tC  2  ■>  tS'C  ®''^  JlJitnpraitH  of  (filfirago 

THE     TRANSFORMATION     OF 

EARLY  CHRISTIANITY  FROM 

AN  ESCHATOLOGICAL 

TO  A  SOCIALIZED 

MOVEMENT 


: 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUnMITTJD  TO  Tlir,  FACULTY 

OF  TTfE  GRADUATE  SCHOOL  OF  ARTS  AXD  LIXrR.V-URE 

IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

DF.PARTMF.NT  OF  CH.'RrH   HT^TORV  IN  run  GRADUATE  DIVI.VITV  SCHOOL 


BY 

LYFORD  PATERSON  EDWARDS,  Ph.D. 


Xiir  OToUrjiIatr  ^rraa 

GFORCJK  BANTA  PUBLISHING  COMPANY 

MENASHA.  WISCONSIN 

1919 


B^\.G 


Columbia  ©nibergitp 

intteCitpofi^ekugork 


i^g 


LIBRARY 


I 


) 


2Il|e  Huiof ratty  of  (HtjUago 


THE     TRANSFORMATION     OF 

EARLY  CHRISTIANITY  FROM 

AN   ESCHATOLOGICAL 

TO  A  SOCIALIZED 

MOVEMENT 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED  TO  THE  FACULTY 

OF  THE  GRADUATE  SCHOOL  OF  ARTS  AND  LITERATURE 

IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

DEPARTMENT  OF  CHURCH  HISTORY  IN  THE  GRADUATE  DIVINITY  SCHOOL 


BY 

LYFORD  PATERSON  EDWARDS 


GEORGE  BANTA  PUBLISHING  COMPANY 
MENASHA,  WISCONSIN 

1919 


CONTENTS 

Chapter     I.     Political  Theories  of  the  Eariy  Christians 1 

Chapter    II.    The  Eariy  Church  and  Property  Concepts 24 

Chapter  III.    The  Early  Church  and  the  Populace 50 

Chapter  IV.     Chiliasm  and  Patriotism 70 

Chapter    V.     Chiliasm  and  Social  Theory 83 


CHAPTER  I 

THE  POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  THE 

EARLY  CHRISTIANS 

When  Christianity  came  into  the  world  it  found  a  number  of 
different  political  theories  already  in  existence.  These  various 
conflicting  concepts;  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Roman,  influenced  Chris- 
tianity in  varying  degrees  and  in  varying  degrees  were  influenced 
by  Christianity.  Christianity  as  such  added  no  new  ideas  to  the 
current  stock  of  political  notions.  The  Hebrew  Christian  retained 
his  Jewish  theory;  as  did  the  Greek  and  the  Roman  in  perhaps  a  less 
degree.  The  development  of  the  Christian  conception  of  the  state, 
the  Church,  and  history  generally  is  a  process  of  elimination,  selection, 
adaptation,  and  synthesis  of  the  various  elements  of  political  theory 
current  in  contemporary  Hebrew  and  pagan  thought. 

The  characteristic  modern  separation  of  Church  and  State,  the 
divorce  between  religion  and  government,  existed  as  a  matter  of  fact 
in  early  Christianity.  But  it  was  forced  upon  the  Christians  by  the 
historical  situation.  As  an  idea  it  was  foreign  alike  to  Jews  and 
Christians,  Greeks  and  Romans.  It  was  contrary  to  the  whole  body 
of  contemporary  political  theory.  The  union  of  Church  and  State 
in  I  the  Fourth  century,  which  has  been  so  deplored  by  many 
modern  historians  and  moralists  was  in  reality  perfectly  inevitable. 
The  social  mind  of  the  whole  ancient  world  made  any  other  course 
impossible  either  to  Christians  or  Pagans  once  Christianity  had 
developed  to  the  point  where  it  was  the  most  powerful  religious 
force  in  society. 

The  theocratic  nature  of  Jewish  thought  and  practice  is  generally 
recognized  but  the  close  connection  of  religion  and  government  in  the 
pagan  educational  system  is  not  perhaps  so  much  emphasized.  To 
quote  Pollock:  "It  costs  us  something  to  realize  the  full  importance 
of  philosophy  to  the  Greek  or  Roman  citizen  who  had  received  a 
liberal  education.  For  him  it  combined  in  one  whole  body  of  doctrine 
all  the  authority  and  influence  which  nowadays  are  divided,  not 
without  contention,  by  science,  philosophy,  and  religion  in  varying 
shares.  It  was  not  an  intellectual  exercise  or  special  study,  but  a 
serious  endeavor  to  gather  up  the  results  of  all  human  knowledge  in 


2  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

their  most  general  form,  and  make  them  available  for  the  practical 
conduct  of  life."^ 

It  was  this  fact  which  made  Christianity's  progress  among  the 
educated  classes  so  slow.  Once  it  had  made  its  way,  however,  the 
taking  over  of  political  control  by  the  Church  was  both  easy  and 
natural. 

One  of  the  most  notable  characteristics  of  the  New  Testament  and 
of  all  early  Christianity  in  its  relation  to  the  existing  political  system 
was  the  doctrine  of  obedience  to  the  constituted  authorities.  That 
a  man  like  St.  Paul  should  advocate  submission  to  a  man  like  Nero 
seems  like  the  negation  of  elementary  morality.  The  reasons  for 
this  attitude  are  many.  In  this  paper  we  are  concerned  only  with 
one  of  them — but  possibly  the  most  important  one.  The  submissive- 
ness  of  the  early  Christians  to  tyranny  and  despotism  was  not  due 
primarily  to  impotence  nor  yet  to  excessive  mildness  of  disposition. 
Many  emperors  before  Constantine  were  deposed  and  slain  by 
political  groups  smaller  and  feebler  than  the  Christians.  St.  Paul 
and  St.  Ignatius,  to  go  no  farther,  were  not  by  nature  pacifists.  It 
would  be  difl&cult  to  find  a  book  of  a  more  militant  tone  than  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John. 

The  main  reason  for  the  political  non-resistance  of  the  early 
Christians  is  to  be  sought  in  their  philosophy;  their  views  of  the 
world.  These  views  were  of  a  very  special  and  very  peculiar  kind. 
They  were  in  large  part  either  directly  inherited  from  Jewish  thought 
or  adapted  from  it.  While  they  are  in  some  respects  inconsistent 
with  one  another,  they  have  a  common  element.  They  are  all  catas- 
trophic. In  all  of  them  the  catastrophy  is  more  or  less  immediately 
imminent. 

The  Old  Testament  Prophets  taught  the  establishment,  in  the 
indefinite  future,  of  an  eternal  Messianic  kingdom  on  this  present 
earth.  For  a  long  time  this  hope  was  cherished  by  every  Jew.  But 
some  time  before  the  beginning  of  the  First  Century  B.C.  a  change 
took  place.  The  old  conception  was  abandoned,  slowly  indeed,  but 
at  last  absolutely.  In  its  place  arose  a  belief  which  developed  into 
Chiliasm  or  Millenarianism.  Perhaps  the  first  clear  statement  of 
this  new  idea  is  to  be  found  in  the  book  known  as  I  Enoch.    In  this 

'  F.  Pollock,  Essays  in  Jurisprudence  and  Ethics,  p.  314.  • 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  3 

work  which  dates  from  104-95  B.C.,  the  Messianic  kingdom  is  for 
the  first  time  conceived  of  as  of  temporary  duration.  The  resurrec- 
tion and  final  judgement  which  in  the  preceding  form  of  belief  were 
the  prelude  to  the  everlasting  Messianic  kingdom  on  earth,  are  now 
transposed  to  the  end  of  the  transitory,  early  kingdom  of  the  Messiah. 
This  temporary  earthly  kingdom  is  no  longer  the  final  abode  of  the 
risen  righteous.  They  are  to  enjoy  a  blessed  immortality  in  the 
eternal  heaven.^ 

We  have  in  this  author  a  practically  complete  statement  of  later 
Christian  Chiliasm.  There  is  indeed  one  important  feature  missing. 
The  specific  duration  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  is  not  given.  The 
advent  of  the  kingdom  also  is  not  pressingly  imminent. 

In  the  Parables  94-64  B.C.  we  find  certain  other  elements.  This 
writer  holds  to  the  eternal  Messianic  kingdom  but  the  scene  of  this 
kingdom  is  not  the  earth  as  at  present  existing  but  a  new  heaven 
and  a  new  earth.  The  Messiah  is  no  longer  a  mere  man  but  a  super- 
natural being.  Four  titles  characteristic  of  the  New  Testament  are 
for  the  first  time  applied  to  him:  "The  Christ,"  "The  Righteous 
One,"  "The  Elect  One,"  "The  Son  of  Man."  He  executes  judg- 
ment on  man  and  enjoys  universal  dominion.  The  resurrection  is 
not  of  the  old  body  but  of  a  body  of  glory  and  light,  of  an  angelic 
nature,  in  short  a  spiritual  body,  though  the  specific  word  spiritual 
is  not  used.^ 

In  the  other  eschatological  works  of  this  period:  e.g.  Psalms  of 
Solomon  70-40  B.C.  Judith  (circa  50  B.C.)  [one  reference];  The 
Sibylline  Oracles  III  1-62  (before  31  B.C.);  The  Epitomiser  of  Jason 
of  Cyrene  (between  100-40  B.C.)  and  the  fragmentary  Zadokite 
Work,  18  B.C.,  the  tradition  of  the  temporary  kingdom  is  carried 
on  but  without  the  addition  of  any  concepts  essential  to  our  purpose. 

In  the  first  century  a.d.,  still  confining  ourselves  to  specifically 
Jewish  Apocalyptic  literature  we  find  various  changes  taking  place. 
The  eternal  Messianic  kingdom  passes  largely  out.  The  temporary 
Messianic  kingdom  becomes  an  eternal  national  one.  The  interest 
of  the  individual  Jew  comes  to  center  on  his  own  lot  in  the  future 
life.^     We  have  to  pass  a  number  of  writers;  Assumption  of  Moses, 

2  Cf.  I  Enoch  XCI-CIV. 

»  Cf.  Parables  in  I  Enoch  XXXVII-IXXI. 

*  Cf.  Apocal>pse  of  Baurch;  4  Ezra,  4  Maccabees. 


4  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

Philo,  etc.,  before  we  come  to  the  specific  statement  of  Chiliasm 
proper,  i.e.,  the  duration  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  for  1000  years. 
In  the  Book  of  The  Secrets  of  Enoch  commonly  known  as  II  Enoch 
(1-50  A.D.)  we  find  for  the  first  time  the  doctrine  which  was  taken 
over  to  make  the  Christian  Millennium.  The  writer  of  II  Enoch 
was  an  Egyptian  Jew.  He  says  that  as  the  world  was  made  in  six 
days,  its  course  will  run  for  six  thousand  years.  The  6000  years 
will  be  followed  by  a  Messianic  kingdom  of  rest  and  blessedness 
lasting  1000  years.  After  that  follows  the  final  judgment,  "  The  great 
day  of  the  Lord." 

Passing  now  to  the  New  Testament,  it  is  only  necessary  for  our 
purpose  to  enumerate  three  different  concepts  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom  that  are  found  therein.  In  these  concepts  contemporaneous 
Jewish  ideas  are  taken  with  more  or  less  transformation. 

The  first  conception  perhaps  holds  the  idea  of  a  present  world 
kingdom  but  puts  emphasis  on  the  futurity  of  the  kingdom.  Its 
ultimate  consumation  is  not  by  gradual,  natural  development,  but 
by  the  catastrophic  reappearance  of  Christ.  This  Second  Advent 
is  to  be  preceeded  by  tremendous  portents  of  the  most  terrible  sort. 

The  second  conception  is  that  the  kingdom  is  already  present  in 
Christ's  appearance  as  the  Messiah.  It  is  to  grow  by  the  natural 
laws  of  spiritual  development  to  its  full  realization.  A  considerable 
length  of  time  is  conceived  as  necessary  for  the  attainment  of  mature 
growth.  The  consumation  of  the  kingdom  in  the  Second  Advent  is 
to  be  unexpected  and  sudden  and  none  but  the  Father  knows  when 
it  will  take  place. 

The  third  conception,  that  of  Chiliasm,  is  that  the  Second  Advent 
of  Christ  is  close  at  hand.  Anti  Christ  and  his  confederates  are  to 
be  destroyed  at  Megiddo.  Satan  is  to  be  bound  for  1000  years  during 
which  is  the  Millennium,  when  the  martyrs  are  raised  in  the  first 
resurrection  and  reign  with  Christ  at  Jerusalem.  This  conception 
is  found  in  the  Revelation  and  perhaps  I  Cor.  XV,  24-27.  All  the 
essential  elements  of  it  are  to  be  found  in  pre-existing  sources,  e.g., 
the  1000  years  in  II  Enoch,  the  reign  of  the  saints  in  Testaments  of 
the  XII  Patriarchs,  etc. 

These  three  conceptions  were  variously  confused  in  early  Chris- 
tianity. All  the  New  Testament  writers  hold,  for  instance,  to  the 
immediately  imminent  Second  Advent.     How  many  of  them  were 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  5 

Chiliasts  we  have  no  way  of  knowing.  The  earhest,  Christian 
writing  extant  outside  the  New  Testament,  which  deals  with  this 
subject  is  perhaps  Papias,  70-155  a.d.  He  is  a  most  materialistic 
Chiliast  and  quotes  II  Baruch  as  an  authentic  utterance  of  Christ 
handed  to  himself  by  apostolic  tradition.* 

Barnabas  is  another  apostolic  Chiliast.  He  expressly  teaches  a 
millennial  reign  of  Christ  on  earth.  The  six  days  of  creation  are  the 
type  of  six  periods  of  1000  years  each.  The  seventh  day  is  the  mil- 
lennium, since  with  God  "one  day  is  as  a  thousand  years."  The 
earthly,  millennial  sabbath  is  to  be  followed  by  an  eighth  and  eternal 
day  in  heaven.  The  Millennium  is  near  at  hand.  Barnabas  does 
not  quote  Revelation.  His  views  can  be  drawn  equally  well  or 
better  from  II  Enoch,  I  Enoch  and  other  Jewish  sources. 

The  first  Chiliast  we  know  of  to  get  into  disrepute  was  the  famous 
heretic,  Cerinthus,  (last  part  of  first  century).  His  heresy  had 
nothing  to  do  with  his  Chiliasm,  as  it  seems  to  have  been  a  sort  of 
Judaistic  Gnosticism  and  Gnosticism  in  general  was  not  favorable 
to  Chiliasm.  However  the  fact  that  so  abhorrent  a  heretic  held 
Chiliastic  views  did  not  help  those  views  in  the  judgment  of  later 
Christians. 

About  the  end  of  the  first  centurv  also  Chiliasm  came  into  rather 
disreputable  prominence  as  a  leading  doctrine  of  the  Ebionites,  a 
sect  of  antitrinitarian  Judaistic-Christian  heretics.  This  sect  was 
wide  spread  though  not  particularly  numerous  and  aroused  the  bitter 
antagonism  of  the  orthodox.  As  in  the  case  of  Cerinthus,  their 
heresy  had  nothing  necessarily  to  do  with  Chiliasm.  But  here  again 
Chiliasm  had  the  misfortune  to  get  into  bad  company. 

In  the  middle  of  the  second  century  Chiliasm  appears  to  have 
been  the  belief  of  the  majority  of  Christians  though  it  never  found 
formal  expression  in  any  creed.  Justin  Martyn,  110-165  a.d.,  tells 
us  that  Christ  is  to  reign  with  the  patriarchs  for  1000  years  in  a 
rebuilt  Jerusalem.  He  bases  this  belief  on  Rev,  XX,  4-5  and  says 
he  holds  this  doctrine  as  part  of  the  body  of  Christian  faith.  He 
adds,  however,  that  "many  good  and  true  Christians  think  other- 
wise." This  later  statement  is  the  more  notable  as  it  is  the  only 
difference  between  orthodox  Christians  which  he  mentions.  He 
places  the  Ebionites  outside  the  Christian  pale. 

6  Irenaeus  Adv.  Haer.  V  il.    II  Baruch  XXIX. 


6  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

The  first  non-Chiliasts  we  meet  with  in  Christian  history  are  the 
Gnostics.  Of  their  actual  position  on  Chiliasm  we  know  practically 
nothing  except  by  inference.  They  did  not  apparently  fight  it. 
They  simply  tacitly  ignored  it.  In  the  long  and  minute  descriptions 
of  various  Gnostic  systems  that  have  come  down  to  us  nothing  is 
said  on  the  subject;  but  the  systems  as  outlined  leave  no  place  for 
the  Chiliastic  doctrines. 

The  first  open  enemies  of  Chiliasm  that  are  to  be  found  in  the 
Church  are  the  Alogi,  a  sect  that  flourished  in  Asia  Minor  about 
160-180  A.D.  According  to  Harnack:  "The  representatives  of  this 
movement  were,  as  far  as  we  know,  the  first  in  the  Church  to  under- 
take a  historical  criticism,  worthy  of  the  name,  of  the  Christian 
scriptures  and  the  Church  tradition."^  They  were  rationalisticly 
inclined,  desired  to  keep  prophecy  out  of  the  Church  and  denied  on 
essentially  the  same  internal  grounds  as  modern  students,  the 
Johannine  authorship  of  the  Revelation  and  also  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  With  less  reason  they  ascribed  the  Revelation  to  the  heretic 
Cerinthus.  Unfortunately  we  know  but  little  about  them.  Hip- 
polytus  wrote  against  them  and  defended  the  apostolic  authorship 
of  Revelation  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  in  two  books  now  lost.  But 
the  Alogi  are  criticised  only  mildly,  and  indeed  Irenaeus  does  not 
class  them  as  heretics  at  all.  Opposition  to  Chiliasm  was  manifestly 
not  looked  upon  as  an  important  matter  in  the  last  quarter  of  the 
second  century — at  least  in  Rome.''  To  this  same  period  belong  the 
writings  of  Gaius  of  Rome  who  asserts  that  the  Heretic  Cerinthus 
wrote  the  Revelation,  and  also  those  of  Bishop  Melito  of  Sardis,  a 
saint  of  great  repute,  who  was  an  ardent  Chiliast.  So  that  at  this 
period  both  Chiliasm  and  non-Chiliasm  would  seem  to  be  perhaps 
equally  wide  spread  and  certainly  equally  permissable.  Irenaeus, 
Bishop  of  Lyons  120-202  a.d.,  was  a  strong  Chiliast.  He  describes 
in  minute  detail  the  overthrow  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the  reign  of 
Anti-Christ  for  1260  days  (three  and  half  years)  the  visible  advent  of 
Christ,  the  binding  of  Satan,  the  joyful  reign  of  Christ  in  the  rebuilt 
Jerusalem  with  the  risen  saints  and  martyrs  over  the  nations  of  the 
world  for  a  thousand  years.     Then  follows  the  temporary  raging  of 

6  Hist,  of  Dogma,  Vol.  HI,  p.  19. 
^  Ens.  H.  E.  VI  27-2. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  7 

Satan,  the  last  victory,  the  general  resurrection  and  judgment,  and 
the  consumation  of  all  things  in  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth. 

The  ascription  of  genuine  divine  inspiration  to  the  Sibylline 
Oracles  by  the  early  Church  writers  is  well  known.  It  is  a  note- 
worthy fact  that  the  Chiliasts*  seem  to  be  much  more  inclined  to 
quote  the  Oracles  than  the  non-Chiliasts.  The  Christians'  addiction 
to  the  Oracles  called  forth  the  derision  of  Celsus.^  Origen  makes  no 
defense  and  it  is  at  least  possible  to  conjecture  that  the  reason  is  that 
he  disapproved  of  the  use  made  of  the  Oracles  by  the  Chiliasts.  The 
Oracles  were  of  course  made  use  of  by  all  sorts  of  agencies  which  for 
any  reason  wished  ill  to  the  Roman  authority  and  yet  dared  not 
indulge  in  secular  sedition.  Some  enthusiastic  Chiliast  put  forth  an 
Oracle,  probably  in  the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  which  was  more 
definite  than  prudent.  According  to  this  prediction  the  end  of  Rome 
and  the  final  consumation  of  all  things  was  due  in  the  year  195-196 
A.D.^"  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  this  prophecy  represented  the 
belief  of  a  considerable  number  of  Christian  Chiliasts.  While  there 
is  no  extant  evidence  to  that  eflfect,  it  is  a  rational  deduction,  that 
when  the  year  195-196  a.d.  passed  without  any  unusual  occurrences, 
the  prestige  of  the  persons  trusting  the  Oracle  would  be  damaged. 
So  far  as  these  persons  were  Chiliasts,  Chiliasra  would  suffer  in 
repute.  That  this  was  actually  the  case  is  as  nearly  certain  as  any 
logical  conclusion  about  psychological  reactions  well  can  be. 

About  the  year  156  a.d.  there  arose  in  Phrygia  the  movement 
called  Montanism.  Essentially  it  was  a  reaction  against  the  growing 
secularization  of  Christianity.  It  spread  to  the  rest  of  Asia  Minor, 
Egypt,  Italy,  Spain,  and  especially  Carthage  and  surrounding  dis- 
tricts in  North  Africa.  It  was  the  strongest  movement  in  favor  of 
a  revival  of  primitive  Puritanism  that  occurs  in  early  Church  history. 
It  lasted  in  the  East  almost  till  the  Arab  Invasion;  in  the  West  it 
did  not  die  out  until  the  time  of  Augustine.  The  Montanists  are 
the  most  pronounced  Chiliasts  we  meet  with.  Not  indeed  in  their 
theory  but  in  their  practice.  One  Syrian  Montanist  bishop  "Per- 
suaded many  brethren  with  their  wives -and  children  to  go  to  meet 
Christ  in  the  wilderness;  another  in  Pontus  induced  his  people  to  sell 

*  Justin  Mart>ii,  TertuUian,  Lactantius. 

9  \d.  Celsus  LXI. 

10  Sib.  Orac.  VIII,  148  seq. 


8  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

all  their  possessions,  to  cease  tilling  their  lands,  to  conclude  no  more 
marriages,  etc.,  because  the  coming  of  the  Lord  was  nigh  at  hand."^^ 
The  Montanist  prophetess,  Prisca,  about  165  a.d.  said:  "After  me 
there  will  come  no  other  prophetess  but  the  end."  A  peculiarity  of 
eastern  Montanistic  Chiliasm  was  the  idea  that  Christ  would  reign 
not  in  Jerusalem  but  in  Pepuza,  a  small  town  in  Phrygia.  In  accord 
with  this  idea  Montanus  tried  to  get  all  believers  to  settle  in  this 
town  to  await  the  Lord's  coming.  The  western  Montanists  however, 
of  whom  TertuUian  was  chief,  held  to  the  regular  belief  that  the 
Messianic  kingdom  would  be  centered  in  Jerusalem. 

Because  of  certain  theological  beliefs  aside  from  Chiliasm,  the 
Montanists  aroused  the  antagonism  of  the  Church  authorities. 
The  earliest  Church  councils  to  be  met  with  after  New  Testament 
times  were  called  for  the  purpose  of  dealing  with  Montanism  which 
was  finally  denounced  as  a  heresy  and  after  the  triumph  of  the 
Church  some  imperial  edicts  were  issued  against  the  sect.  For  the 
first  time  in  the  attack  on  Montanism  at  the  end  of  the  second  and 
early  part  of  the  third  Century  we  find  Chiliastic  beliefs  referred  to 
as  'carnal  and  Jewish.'  There  is  no  formal  condemnation  of  Chiliasm 
as  such,  but  once  more,  and  much  more  seriously  than  in  the  case 
of  the  Ebionites,  Chiliasm  suffered  from  being  associated  in  the  minds 
of  orthodox  Christians  with  heresy  and  schism.  It  would  however 
be  very  easy  to  exaggerate  the  effect  of  this  and  it  is  necessary  to  bear 
in  mind  that  while  the  literature  of  Montanism  is  fairly  considerable, 
Chiliasm  is  an  entirely  subordinate  matter  in  the  controversy  and 
indeed  seems  sometimes  to  be  mentioned  merely  casually.  The 
Chiliastic  writers  are  perhaps  more  inclined  to  view  Montanism 
leniently.    Irenaeus  does  not  include  it  in  his  list  of  heresies. 

Its  association  with  Montanism  brought  Chiliasm  into  disrepute 
and  suspicion  with  the  Church  hierarchy  and  it  is  not  surprising  that 
beginning  with  the  last  years  of  the  second  century  we  find  a  deliber- 
ate system  of  suppression  adopted  by  certain  ecclesiastical  authorities 
— notably  in  Egypt.  As  we  shall  try  to  show  later,  the  declension  of 
Chiliasm  can  be  only  very  imperfectly  explained  by  official  antagon- 
ism. But  so  far  as  this  declension  can  be  ascribed  to  individuals,  the 
three  great  Alexandrian  divines;  Clement,  Origen,  and  Dionysius 
have  a  prominent  part.    The  influence  of  these  men  counted  the  more 

"  Hippolytus,  Com.  on  Daniel. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  9 

as  it  was  consistently  exercised  in  the  same  locality  with  increasing 
force  during  a  period  of  more  than  half  a  century.  The  first  of  these 
writers,  Clement  (150-216  a.d.)  does  not  specifically  refer  to  the 
Chiliasts  but  there  are  a  number  of  passages  where  he  evidently  has 
them  in  mind.'-  However  the  probability  is  that  this  very  refraining 
from  direct  attack  made  his  efforts  the  more  successful.  He  empha- 
sizes the  fact  that  scriptural  statements — particularly  scriptural 
numbers — are  not  to  be  taken  literally  but  are  to  be  understood  as  of 
mystical  significance.  If  Clement  consciously  aimed  at  the  extirpa- 
tion of  Chiliasm  (which  is  not  absolutely  certain)  he  at  any  rate  took 
the  most  eflfective  means  for  accomplishing  that  result.  The  great 
presupposition  upon  which  Christian  Chiliasm  has  been  based  is  that 
of  the  literal  interpretation  of  Scripture.  By  attacking  that  pre- 
supposition Clement  caused  the  doctrine  to  be  questioned  by  many 
persons  whose  attachment  to  Chiliasm  would  doubtless  have  only 
been  strengthened  by  direct  attack  upon  that  tenet  in  particular. 
He  prepared  the  way  for  the  open  and  far  more  powerful  attacks 
upon  Chiliasm  made  by  his  great  successor  in  the  Catechetical  School, 
Origen  (185-254  A.D.).  The  position  of  this  great  theologian  is  the 
most  equivocal  of  any  writer  who  has  attained  eminence  in  Christian 
theology.  How  far  anything  he  wrote  is  to  be  considered  as  orthodox 
is  a  most  difficult  matter  to  determine.  The  fact  that  Origen  opposed 
Chiliasm,  taken  by  itself,  apart  from  the  subsequent  fate  of  the 
doctrine,  could  just  as  easily  be  made  a  commendation  as  a  condemna- 
tion of  that  belief.  Almost  alone  among  Christian  men  Origen  has 
been  removed  from  the  calendar  of  Catholic  saints  after  having 
been  duly  received  as  a  saint  for  the  space  of  more  than  a  hundred  and 
fifty  years.  This  unique  fact,  which  is  of  course  of  far  more  impor- 
tance for  theology  than  for  history,  has  nevertheless  a  bearing  on  our 
'  subject.  The  condemnation  of  Origen  came  too  late  to  save  the 
Chiliastic  apologetic  in  the  East  but  it  very  possibly  may  have  had  an 
indirect  influence  in  the  matter  of  continuing  the  repute  of  western 
Chiliasm. 

Origen  attacked  Chiliasm  in  two  vital  points:  First  he  insisted 
even  more  strongly  than  Clement  upon  the  figurative  or  mystical  or 
'typical'  interpretation  of  Scripture.  In  this  regard  he  specifically 
quotes  a  number  of  Chiliastic  passages  of  scripture  and  definitely 

1'  Strom.  VII,  17;  VI  16;  TV  25;  V  6,  14. 


10  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

says  that  their  meaning  is  to  be  taken  figuratively.^'     But  more 
important  than  that,  he  definitely  substitutes  the  theory  of  progres- 
sive development  of  the  intellectual  and  spiritual  element  of  man  for 
the  physical  and  sensuous  earthly  kingdom  of  the  Chiliasts.     This 
was  certainly  a  great  gain  for  the  anti-Chiliastic  theory  which  for  the 
first  time  took  a  logical  and  comprehensible  if  a  somewhat  meta- 
physical form.     However  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  argument  of 
Origen  though  wonderfully  clear  headed  and  almost  miraculously 
modern"  is  too  purely  intellectual  and  cast  in  too  philosophical  a 
form  to  have  any  direct  influence  on  ordinary  individuals.     It  was 
doubtless   quite  in  place  in   the   Catechetical   School  and  among 
scholars  in  the  great  centers  of  ancient  learning  but  outside  those 
limits  its  influence — at  least  directly — must  have  been  very  small. 
Nepos,  an  Egyptian  bishop,  answered  Origen  in   a  book  entitled: 
"Refutation  of  Allegorists."    This  book  is  lost  but  we  know  that  it 
was  considered  by  the  Chiliasts  to  be  a  work  of  the  most  powerful  and 
indeed  irrefutable  sort.    In  the  Arsinoite  nome  (on  the  west  bank  of 
the  Nile  south  of  Memphis)  the  Chiliastic  doctrines  were  held  by 
whole  villages  together  and  Dionysius  the  Great  (Bishop  of  Alex- 
andria 247-264  A.D.)  found  it  necessary  to  visit  this  region  and  hold  a 
public  argument  and  instruction  in  order  to  avert  a  schism.    By  the 
tact  and  conciliatory  attitude  of  the  Bishop  the  Chiliasts  were  either 
won  over  to  the  non-Chiliastic  view  or  at  least  expressed  their  grati- 
fication at  the  conference.    It  would  appear,  however,  as  if  this  synod 
or  meeting  was  not  sufficient  to  destroy  the  influence  of  Nepos'  book 
so  Dionysius  wrote  in  refutation  of  it  two  books  "On  the  Promises." 
Except  for  a  few  fragments  these  books  have  perished.     We  know 
merely  that  the  first  book  contained  a  statement  of  the  non-Chiliastic 
view  and  the  second  a  detailed  discussion  of  the  Revelation  in  relation 
to  Chiliasm  and  to  the  views  of  Nepos. 

However,  Dionysius,  who  was  well  aware  that  as  long  as  the 
'Revelation  of  St.  John'  was  received  as  a  genuine  work  of  the  Apostle 
it  would  be  difficult  to  oppose  Chiliasm,  gives  a  very  strong  argument 
against  the  apostolic  authorship  while  diplomatically  saying  at  the 
beginning  of  his  discussion  that  he  is  able  to  agree  that  the  Revelation 

"DePrinc,  II,  11. 

"  Cf.  e.g.,  A.  R,  Wallace,  The  World  of  Life. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  1  1 

is  the  work  of  a  holy  and  inspired  man."*'  There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  this  refutation  of  Nepos  by  Dionysius  met  with  success 
wherever  Christian  Hellenisticism  exercised  influence.  But  it  by  no 
means  extirpated  ChiUasm  in  Egypt.  For  many  generations  after 
its  author's  death  Chiiiasm  was  still  believed  by  the  monks  of  the 
Thebiad.  In  fact  a  large  number  of  Jewish  Apocalyses  which  the 
early  Christians  accepted  as  inspired  are  preserved  to  us  bound  up  in 
Coptic  and  Ethiopic  copies  of  the  scriptures.  The  Alexandrians  had, 
however,  succeeded  so  well  that  in  the  subsequent  period  there  are 
only  two  defenders  of  Chiiiasm  in  the  Eastern  Church  that  are  worthy 
of  mention.  These  two  are  Methodius  of  Tyre  and  Apollinaris  of 
Laodicea. 

Methodius  260-312  a.d.  was  bishop  first  of  Olympus  and  Patara 
in  Lycia  and  afterwards  of  Tyre  in  Phoenicia.  He  is  notable  for  his 
opposition  to  Origen  and  for  his  relatively  more  spiritualized  Chii- 
iasm. He  maintains  that  in  the  Mellennium,  death  will  be  abolished 
and  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  will  not  marry  or  beget  children  but 
live  in  all  happiness  like  the  angels  without  change  or  decay.  He  is 
very  careful  to  insist  upon  the  literal  resurrection  of  the  body,  how- 
ever, and  emphasizes  the  fact  that  the  risen  saints  while  like  the  angels 
do  not  become  angels.'^    He  died  a  martyr  at  Chalcis  in  Greece. 

Apollinaris  of  Laodicea  (300P-390  a.d.)  is  a  notable  figure  in  Chris- 
tological  controversy  but  unfortunately  very  little  that  he  wrote  has 
come  down  to  us,  and  of  that  little  the  authenticity  is  not  entirely 
unimpeachable.  We  are  constrained  to  get  his  Chiliastic  views  from 
the  writings  of  his  theological  opponents  and  unfortunately  there  is 
not  wanting  evidence  to  the  effect  that  these  opponents,  Basil  the 
Great  and  Gregory  Nazianzen,  notable  Christians  as  they  were, 
were  not  lacking  in  bias.  Gregory*''  calls  the  Chiliastic  doctrine  of 
the  Apolinarians  'gross  and  carnal,'  a  'second  Judaism'  and  speaks 
of  'their  silly  thousand  years  delight  in  paradise.'  Basil'*  calls  the 
Chiiiasm  of  Apolinaris  'mythical  or  rather  Jewish,'  'ridiculous,'  and 
'  contrary  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel.'  This  is,  so  far  as  the  writer 
is  aware,  the  first  instance  in  which  any  great  theologian  goes  to 

»  Eus.  H.  E.  VII  25. 

'•  Discourse  on  the  Resurrection,  I,  9  seq.    See  also  ConNnv.  IX,  1,  5. 

"  Ep.  CII,  4. 

"  Ep.  CCLXIII,  4. 


12  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

such  extremes  and  Basil's  language,  though  strong,  is  not  altogether 
without  an  element  of  hesitation  and  questioning.  In  short  it  would 
seem  that  he  asserted  more  than  he  felt  sure  of  being  able  to  prove — 
no  rare  phenomenon  unfortunately  in  certain  of  the  great  contra- 
versialists.  If  Basil's  statements  are  to  be  taken  at  their  face  value 
Apolinaris  was  indeed  the  most  Judaising  Christian  in  his  Chiliasm 
of  any  of  whom  we  have  record.  He  would  seem  to  justify  Basil's 
jibe  'we  are  to  be  altogether  turned  from  Christians  into  Jews,' 
for  in  his  Messianic  kingdom  not  only  is  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem 
to  be  restored  but  also  the  worship  of  the  old  Law,  with  high  priest, 
sacrifices,  the  ashes  of  a  heifer,  the  jealousy  offering,  shew  bread, 
burning  lamps,  circumcision  and  other  such  things  which  Basil 
indignantly  denounces  as  'figments,'  'mere  old  wives  fables'  and 
'doctrines  of  Jews.'^^  Although  Apolinarianism  was  condemned 
by  a  council  at  Alexandria  as  early  as  362  a.d.  and  Roman  councils 
followed  suit  in  377  and  378  and  the  second  Ecumenical  Council  in 
381  and  though  Imperial  degrees  were  issued  against  it  in  388,  397 
and  428  it  persisted  for  many  generations.  The  last  condemnation 
on  record  is  that  of  the  Quinisextum  Synod  691  a.d. 

In  this  case,  as  in  others  mentioned,  we  see  the  unfortunate  fate 
of  Chiliasm  in  getting  mixed  up  with  heresies  with  which  it,  as  such, 
had  nothing  to  do.  The  extraordinary  detestation  which  overtook 
Apollinaris  as  arch-heretic  par  excellence  seems  to  have  finally  dis- 
couraged Chiliasm  in  the  Eastern  Church.  It  was  reckoned  as  a 
heresy  thereafter  and  though  it  appears  sporadically  down  to  our 
own  day  it  is  of  no  more  interest  for  our  purpose. 

In  the  Western  Church  Chiliasm  prevailed  until  the  time  of 
Augustine.  It  seems  to  have  provoked  very  little  discussion  or 
controversy.  Hippolytus,  235  a.d.,  carries  on  the  Chiliastic  tradi- 
tion of  Irenaeus  but  with  a  certain  degree  of  assured  futurity  about 
the  Second  Advent  not  found  in  the  earlier  writers.  This  pushing 
of  the  Second  Advent  into  the  future  is  a  marked  feature  of  Western 
Chiliasm.  By  a  weird  use  of  'types'  Hippolytus  proves  with  entire 
conclusiveness  to  himself  that  the  Second  Advent  is  to  occur  in  the 
year  500  a.d.^"  The  overthrow  of  Rome  has  a  prominent  part  in  his 
elaborate  description  of  the  last  times  but  he  veils  his  statements  with 

»  Cp.  CCLXV,  2. 
"Frag.  Dan.  I,  5,  6. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  13 

a  certain  amount  of  transparent  discretion."'  He  has  in  all  other 
essential  respects  the  same  ideas  as  Irenaeus  but  expressed  in  a  less 
naive  form.  He  is  a  transition  figure.  His  Second  Advent  is  far 
enough  off  to  allow  some  considerable  latitude  for  the  building  up 
of  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy  which  was  the  business  of  Rome  and 
he  emphasizes  the  point  that  the  '*  gospel  must  first  be  preached  to 
all  nations."     John  the  Baptist  reappears  as  the  precursor  of  Christ. 

Commodianus,  a  North  African  bishop,  240  a.d.,  represents  the 
generation  after  Hippolytus.  His  two  poems  present  rather  different 
versions  of  Chiliasm.  The  first  is  a  simple  and  rather  pleasing  ver- 
sion." The  only  notable  variation  it  contains  is  that  the  risen  saints 
in  the  Millennial  Kingdom  are  to  be  served  by  the  nobles  of  the  con- 
quered anti-Christ.  The  second  poem  is  an  apologetic  against  Jews 
and  Gentiles.  "The  author  expects  the  end  of  the  world  will  come 
with  the  seventh  persecution.  The  Goths  will  conquer  Rome  and 
redeem  the  Christians;  but  then  Nero  will  appear  again  as  the 
heathen  anti-Christ,  reconquer  Rome  and  rage  against  the  Christians 
three  years  and  a  half.  He  will  in  turn  be  conquered  by  the  Jewish 
and  real  anti-Christ  from  the  East,  who,  after  the  defeat  of  Nero  and 
the  burning  of  Rome,  will  return  to  Judea,  perform  false  miracles 
and  be  worshipped  by  the  Jews.  At  last  Christ  appears  with  the 
lost  tribes,  as  his  army,  who  had  lived  beyond  Persia  in  happy  sim- 
plicity and  virtue.  Under  astounding  phenomena  of  nature  he  will 
conquer  anti-Christ  and  his  host,  convert  all  nations  and  take  pos- 
session of  the  holy  city  of  Jerusalem. "^^  This  double  anti-Christ 
is  perhaps  the  most  notable  variation.  This  idea  reappears  later, 
as  does  the  Nero  return  which  would  seem  to  have  been  current 
belief. 

There  are  perhaps  only  two  other  writers  before  Augustine  that 
are  worthy  of  mention,  Victorinus  and  Lactantius.  Victorinus, 
bishop  of  Poetovio,  i.e.,  Petair  in  Austria,  martyred  304  a.d.,  is  the 
earliest  exegete  of  the  Latin  Church.  His  'Commentary  on  the 
Apocalypse'  has  come  down  to  us  in  bad  shape.  The  Chiliasm  is  of 
a  type  which  may  be  described  as  formal  and  rituahstic  in  the  sense 
that  it  is  expressed  in  a  matter  of  fact  way  as  something  not  needing 

»  De  Christo  et  Antic.  50. 

^  Instructions,  LXXX. 

»  Schaff  Hist.,  ii,  855.     Sec.  LXVII  of  poem. 


14  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

explanation,  much  less  proof.  There  are  only  two  new  ideas:  "The 
first  resurrection  is  now  of  the  souls  that  are  by  the  faith,  which  does 
not  permit  men  to  pass  over  to  the  second  death"^'  and  "Those  years 
wherein  Satan  is  bound  are  in  the  first  advent  of  Christ  even  to  the 
end  of  the  age;  and  they  are  called  a  thousand  according  to  that 
mode  of  speaking  wherein  a  part  is  signified  by  the  whole — although 
they  are  not  a  thousand."" 

Lactantius  the  preceptor  of  Crispus,  son  of  Constantine,  brings 
us  to  the  Chiliasm  of  the  established  Church.  The  end  of  the  present 
age  and  the  coming  of  the  millennial  kingdom  are  at  the  latest  200 
years  in  the  future,  probably  nearer,  but  the  event  instead  of  being 
looked  toward  to,  is  dreaded.  The  forthcoming  destruction  of  Rome 
is  bewailed.  The  world  is  safe  as  long  as  Rome  stands.  Nero  is  to 
be  anti-Christ.  "They  who  shall  be  alive  in  their  bodies  shall  not 
die,  but  during  those  thousand  years  shall  produce  an  infinite  multi- 
tude, and  their  offspring  shall  be  holy  and  beloved  of  God;  but  they 
who  shall  be  raised  from  the  dead  shall  preside  over  the  living  as 
judges.  The  nations  shall  not  be  entirely  extinguished,  but  some 
shall  be  left  as  a  victory  for  God,  that  they  may  be  the  occasion  of 
triumph  to  the  righteous  and  may  be  subjected  to  perpetual 
slavery."^®  The  Chiliasm  of  Lactantius  is  proved  from  the  Sibylline 
Oracles  and  from  the  philosopher  Chrysippus,  a  Stoic.  For  the  rest 
Lactantius  repeats  the  traditional  Christian  and  pre-Christian  Jewish 
Chiliastic  concepts  with  very  little  variation,  but  it  is  evident  that 
the  fact  that  the  fall  of  Rome  is  dreaded  will  work  out  a  change.  The 
Chiliasm  of  Lactantius  is  unstable,  not  that  there  is  the  slightest 
breath  of  doubt  about  it,  but  that  the  attitude  of  mind  which  looked 
forward  with  dread  to  the  Second  Advent  could  be  depended  upon 
to  find  a  theory  for  postponing  it.  Chiliasm  is  ready  for  its  trans- 
formation. 

In  the  century  between  Lactantius  and  Augustine  there  is  noChili- 
ast  of  note  in  the  west.  It  is  aboundantly  evident  however,  from  the 
works  of  Augustine  that  Chiliasm  was  common  during  that  period  as 
well  as  in  the  time  of  Augustine.  Indeed  Augustine  himself  was  a  Chili- 
ast  though  probably  not  an  exceedingly  literal  one,  during  his  early 

^  Comm.  XX  4.5. 
25  Comm.  XX  1.3. 
2«  Div.  Ins.  Bk.  7  XXIV. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  15 

period  in  the  Church.-^  It  iscertain  that  he  never  regarded  the  doctrine 
as  heretical.  Even  in  the  very  book  in  which  he  puts  forth  the  doctrine 
which  eventually  superseded  Chiliasm  he  says:  "This  opinion  would 
not  be  objectionable  if  it  were  believed  that  the  joys  of  the  saints  in 
that  Sabbath-^  shall  be  spiritual  and  consequent  on  the  presence  of 
God."^*  We  have  in  this  quotation  a  hint  as  to  the  reason  why  he 
abandoned  Chiliasm.  He  elaborates  this  in  the  immediately  follow- 
ing passage:  "As  they  say  that  those  who  then  rise  again  shall  enjoy 
the  leisure  of  immoderate  carnal  banquets,  furnished  with  an  amount 
of  meat  and  drink  such  as  not  only  to  shock  the  feeling  of  the  temper- 
ate, but  even  to  surpass  the  measure  of  credulity  itself,  such  assertions 
can  be  believed  only  by  the  carnal."^' 

Disgust  with  this  literal  interpretation  of  the  scripture  was  thus 
one  of  the  reasons  which  drew  Augustine  away  from  Chiliasm.  A 
more  direct  reason  was  that  he  had  an  idea  of  his  own  as  to  how  the 
Chiliastic  Scriptural  passage^''  should  be  interpreted. 

The  discussion  in  which  he  vanquishes  the  Chiliastic  concept  is  a 
model  of  contraversial  method.  It  would  be  difficult  to  find  its 
superior  either  in  sacred  or  profane  polemics.  Perfectly  conscious  of 
his  own  powers  to  make  Chiliasm  appear  at  once  absurd  and  ridicu- 
lous he  refrains  from  doing  so.  Abundantly  able  though  he  was  to 
refute  the  Millennians  point  by  point  he  deliberately  foregoes  that 
method  of  attack.  His  argument  which  overthrew  an  ancient,  famous, 
and  widespread  doctrine  of  primitive  Christianity  contains  hardly  a 
line  either  of  refutation  or  condemnation.  It  is  perhaps  the  finest 
example  in  Christian  literature  of  the  'positive  apologetic'  The 
Chiliastic  literature,  even  that  which  has  come  down  to  us,  contains 
so  much  that  is  fantastic  and  ludicrous  that  it  would  have  been 
very  easy  for  a  man  of  far  less  power  than  Augustine  to  hold  it  up 
to  contempt  and  scorn.  It  abounds  in  the  same  kind  of  absurdities 
and  incongruities  as  the  pagan  myths  which  proviked  so  many 
stinging  pages  from  the  early  apologists  and  from  Augustine  himself. 
The  fact  that  Augustine  did  not  yield  to  the  temptation  to  make  his 
opponents  ridiculous  is  in  the  highest  degree  creditable  to  his  head 

"  CD.  XX  7. 

**  I.e.,  the  Millennium. 

»  CD.  XX  7. 

»o  Rev.  XX. 


16  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

and  his  heart.  He  did  not  violate  the  precepts  of  Christian  charity 
and  he  obtained  a  victory  greater  than  would  have  been  within  even 
his  power  had  he  yielded  to  the  natural  temptation  of  a  great  intellect 
to  show  up  the  mental  inferiority  of  his  opponents. 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  Augustine's  treatment  of  Chiliasrn 
with  Origen's.  The  two  men  are  very  comparable  as  regards  extent 
and  variety  of  knowledge,  intellectual  power,  and  philosophic  insight. 
They  are  very  unlike  however,  in  their  treatment  of  the  subject. 
Origen  simply  explains  away  the  whole  Chiliastic  concept  or  rather 
so  spiritualizes  it  that  nothing  resembling  the  original  idea  is  left. 
His  whole  insistence  is  that  it  must  be  taken  figuratively,  and  without 
the  least  warrant  he  asserts  that  his  interpretation  is  "according  to 
the  understanding  of  the  apostles. "^^  He  makes  the  whole  subject  so 
subjective,  so  intellectual,  so  metaphysical  that  there  is  left  no  con- 
tent for  the  ordinary  man  to  hold  to  in  place  of  that  which  is  demol- 
ished. In  the  overthrow  of  Eastern  Chiliasrn  Origen  holds  as 
conspicuous  a  position  as  Augustine  in  the  overthrow  of  Western. 
He  did  away  with  a  doctrine,  too  carnal  perhaps,  but  at  any  rate  con- 
crete and  comforting,  and  he  substituted  an  intellectual  abstraction. 
For  instance  in  explaining,  or  better  explaining  away,  the  Chiliastic 
feasts  in  the  New  Jerusalem  he  says:^^  "The  rational  nature  growing 
by  each  individual  step,  enlarged  in  understanding  and  in  power  of 
perception  is  increased  in  intellectual  growth;  and  ever  gazing  purely 
on  the  causes  of  things  it  attains  perfection,  firstly,  viz.,  that  by 
which  it  ascends  to  the  truth,  and  secondly  that  by  which  it  abides 
in  it,  having  problems  and  the  understanding  of  things  and  the 
causes  of  things  as  the  food  on  which  it  may  feast.  And  in  all  things 
this  food  is  to  be  understood  as  the  contemplation  and  understanding 
of  God,  which  is  of  a  measure  appropriate  and  suitable  to  this  nature, 
which  was  made  and  created,  etc." 

This  kind  of  thing  is  the  intellectual  equivalent  of  the  process  in 
physics  by  which  the  scientist  takes  some  tangible  solid  body  and 
proceeds  first  to  liquify  it,  then  to  volitilize  it  and  finally  to  blow  it 
entirely  away.  We  strongly  suspect  that  the  Eastern  Chiliasts  felt 
that  the  whole  thing  was  a  kleptistic  legerdemain  by  which  they  were 

"DePrin.  II,  11,  3. 
32DePrin.  II,  11,  7. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  (  IIRISTIANS  17 

deprived  of  a  favorite  doctrine  without  receiving  anything  in  place  of 
it. 

Augustine's  method  differs  toto  caelo  from  this.  While  Origcn 
handles  the  subject  like  a  metaphysician,  Augustine  handles  it  like 
a  statesman.  His  doctrine  is  just  as  concrete  as  the  one  he  displaces. 
He  takes  nothing  away  without  giving  something  ecjually  tangible 
and  of  better  quality  in  its  place.  The  transition  from  Chiliasm  to  the 
Origenistic  conception  of  the  future,  would  be,  for  the  ordinary 
person,  an  incredible  and  almost  impossible  intellectual  feat.  The 
transition  from  Chiliasm  to  the  Augustinian  conception  of  the  future 
is  natural,  easy,  and  perfectly  within  the  power  of  a  very  ordinary 
and  commonplace  mentality.  As  a  matter  of  fact  it  made  its  way 
without  the  smallest  difficulty  into  the  religious  consciousness  of  the 
whole  of  western  Christianity.  Any  person  who  aims  at  changing 
the  theological  opinions  of  others  can  find  no  better  manual  of  method 
than  the  twentieth  book  of  the  City  of  God.  Augustine  was  very 
careful  to  keep  all  the  symbols,  catch  words,  and  paraphernalia  of 
Chiliasm.  He  was  careful  not  only  to  keep  them  all  but  to  keep  them 
all  in  their  literal  sense.  He  explains  away  none  of  them  and  alle- 
gorizes none  of  them.  By  carefully  preserving  the  ancient  shibboleths 
he  was  easily  able  to  empty  them  of  their  former  content.  He  holds 
to  the  millennium,  the  idea  that  is,  of  thousand  years,  as  firmly  as 
any  Chiliast  but  he  says  the  thousand  years  is  to  be  reckoned  as 
dating  from  the  establishment  of  the  Church  on  earth  i.e.,  the  first 
coming  of  Christ.  So  he  is  careful  to  preserve  the  phrase:  "The 
Reign  of  the  Saints";  he  merely  substitutes  for  the  Chiliastic  content 
of  that  phase  the  very  comfortable  and  plausable  doctrine  that  the 
saints  are  his  own  Christian  contemporaries.  He  is  very  skillful,  not 
to  say  flattering,  in  his  method  of  'putting  this  across.'  So  he  retains 
similarly  the  old  formula  about  the  two  resurrections — but  makes 
the  first  resurrection  out  to  be  the  marvelous  transformation  and 
participation  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ  which  the  Christian  exper- 
iences by  virtue  of  the  sacrament  of  baptism.  More  important  still 
is  his  new  content  for  the  phrase  ''Kingdom  of  Heaven."  This 
instead  of  a  state  of  future  blessedness  becomes  the  already  existing 
church  on  earth.  Finally  he  indulges  in  a  long  and  apparently 
straight  faced  discussion  as  to  whether  the  reign  of  anti-Christ — 
which    he    preserves    in    its    most  literal  form  with  the  regulation 


18  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

duration  of  three  years  and  a  half — whether  this  is  to  be  reckoned  as 
part  of  the  thousand  years  or  not.  This  inconsequential  detail  is 
labored  at  length  in  such  a  manner  as  to  delight  the  soul  of  any  good 
Bible  reading  Chiliast.  By  preserving  till  the  last  this  single  element 
of  Chiliasm  which  he  leaves  untouched  and  then  treating  it  in  the 
good,  old,  religious  fashion  oflrenaeusor  some  other  primitive  worthy, 
he  very  skillfully  disarms  criticism  and  it  is  only  by  a  strong  effort 
that  the  reader  realizes  what  a  tremendous  blow  has  been  struck  at 
the  original  Chiliastic  doctrine. 

Let  us  see  what  the  changes  of  Augustine  amount  to.  It  is  not 
less  than  the  total  destruction  of  Chiliasm,  or  at  the  very  least  the 
postponement  of  the  end  of  the  world  till  the  year  1000  a.d.  Augus- 
tine's doctrine  is  essentially  that  of  the  ordinary,  orthodox,  Bible 
Christian  today.  Sometime  in  the  future — Augustine  said  possibly 
in  the  year  1000  a.d. — Christ  was  to  come  again  to  the  earth.  Then 
follows  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  the  final  judgment,  and  heaven 
and  hell.  The  questions  about  the  three  years  and  a  half  of  anti- 
Christ,  together  with  Gog  and  Magog — great  favorites  with  the 
Chiliasts — are  held  to  be  insoluable  as  to  the  time  of  their  appearance; 
whether  to  be  reckoned  as  part  of  the  thousand  years  or  immediately 
succeeding  it. 

It  is  commonly  said  that  Augustine  is  responsible  for  the  belief 
that  the  world  was  to  come  to  an  end  in  the  year  1000  a.d.  This  is  not 
strictly  correct.  Augustine  nowhere  makes  that  direct  assertion. 
He  nowhere — so  far  as  the  writer  is  aware — even  implies  it.  What 
he  does  is  to  offer  it  as  a  possible  alternative  hypothesis  to  the  idea 
that  the  thousand  years,  (since  1000  is  the  cube  of  10,)  is  to  be  taken  as 
a  statement  of  the  total  duration  of  the  world.  As  the  matter  is  of 
some  interest  we  give  the  original  passage  in  Dod's  translation:'^ 
"Now  the  thousand  years  may  be  understood  in  two  ways  so  far  as 
occurs  to  me:  either  because  these  things  happen  in  the  sixth  thous- 
and of  years  or  sixth  millennium  (the  latter  part  of  which  is  now 
passing)  as  if  during  the  sixth  day,  which  is  to  be  followed  by  a  sab- 
bath which  has  no  evening,  the  endless  rest  of  the  saints,  so  that, 
speaking  of  a  part  under  the  name  of  the  whole,  he  calls  the  last  part 
of  the  millennium^-the  part  that  is  which  had  yet  to  expire  before 
the  end  of  the  world — a  thousand  years;  or  he  used  the  thousand 

^  City  of  God  in  Nicene  and  Post  Nicene  Fathers,  1st  Series,  Vol.  II,  p.  427. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  19 

years  as  an  equivalent  for  the  whole  duration  of  this  world,  employing 
the  number  of  perfection  to  mark  the  fullness  of  time.  For  a  thousand 
is  the  cube  of  ten.  .  .  .  For  the  same  reason  we  cannot  better 
interpret  the  words  of  the  psalm.  "The  word  which  he  commanded 
to  a  thousand  generations,"  than  by  understanding  it  to  mean,  "to 
all  generations." 

The  above  sketch  summarizes  essentially  all  that  has  survived 
about  the  Chiliasm  of  the  early  Church.  The  Chiliastic  passages  in 
the  Church  literature  up  to  and  including  Augustine,  though  rather 
widely  scattered,  are  not  great  in  bulk.  If  printed  together  they 
would  make  only  a  moderate  sized  pamphlet.  But  their  importance 
is  by  no  means  to  be  measured  by  their  size.  Chiliasm,  better  than 
any  other  movement  of  the  early  period,  serves  as  a  standard  for 
measuring  the  degree  of  the  socialization  of  Christianity.  It  com- 
prises the  only  body  of  doctrine  which  passed  from  practically  univer- 
sal acceptance  to  practically  universal  repudiation  during  the  period 
when  the  Church  changed  from  a  small  esoteric  cult  to  a  dominant 
factor  of  society.  Considered  from  this  point  of  view,  the  causes  of 
the  decline  of  Chiliasm  possess  a  historical  importance  out  of  all 
proportion  to  the  importance  of  Chiliasm  itself.  More  than  any 
other  religious  movement  of  the  time  Chiliasm  was  free  from  the 
direct  pressure  of  distinctly  religious  influences.  Its  declension  was 
more  nearly  a  case  of  unconscious  social  and  psychological  deter- 
minism than  any  other  contemporary  theological  phenomenon.  Its 
chief  supporters  and  opponents  are  not  to  be  regarded  so  much  as 
factors  in  its  history,  as  points  where  the  socializing  forces  operating 
in  the  early  Church  become  for  the  moment  visible. 

Certain  facts  stand  out  even  in  the  short  epitome  we  have  given. 
Chiliasm  never  became  powerful  in  the  great  cities.  It  survived 
longest  and  was  most  popular  in  regions^  comparatively  cut  off  from 
the  great  centers  of  civilization.  Hellenizing  influences  were  unfavor- 
able to  it,  Romanizing  influences  indifferent  to  it. 

The  reasons  for  this  are  numerous  and  most  of  them  have  been 
treated  sufliciently  by  previous  investigators,  but  in  the  writer's 
judgment  certain  other  important  influences  have  been  either  slighted 
or  entirely  ignored.     We  shall  consider  one  or  two. 

^  E.g.,  Lydia,  Phngia,  The  Thebaid. 


20  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

The  supremely  important  fact  in  early  Christian  history  is  the 
development  of  the  concept  of  "The  Church"  as  an  independent, 
self-existing,  metaphysical  entity.  This  metaphysical  entity  was 
conceived  as  embodying  itself  in  the  whole  body  of  believers;  living, 
dead,  and  yet  to  be  born.  The  entity  was  eternal,  indestructable, 
and  in  its  essence  immutable.  Although  partially  embodied  in  a 
visible  society  its  essential  being  was  conceived  as  independently 
sustained  in  the  nature  of  the  universe.  It  was  an  idea  in  the  strict 
Platonic  sense.  No  concept  like  this  is  found  in  the  contemporary 
pagan  cults.  Even  the  Jewish  concept  of  the  'chosen  people'  is 
ethnic  or  national  rather  than  purely  religious  and  it  has  no  tinge  of 
that  metaphysical  existence  which  is  the  most  notable  element  in  the 
Catholic  concept  of  the  Church.  The  elements  out  of  which  'the 
Church'  concept  was  constructed  were  four:  two  Roman,  one  Greek 
and  one  Hebrew.  The  Roman  lawyers,  in  the  process  of  fitting  a 
municipal  legal  system  to  a  world  empire,  evolved  the  twin  legal 
entities,  'state'  and  'sovereignty.'  These  entities  were  endowed 
with  divers  qualities;  eternity,  immutability,  etc.,  but  especially  with 
the  quality  of  having  existential  reality  apart  from  any  individual 
embodiment  thereof.  Greek  philosophy  contributed  the  idea  of  the 
Cosmopolis,  the  ideal  world-city  in  which  the  fullest  development  of 
human  personality  was  to  be  attained.  This  concept  was  as  purely 
metaphysical  as  the  self-existing,  absolute  '  state'  of  the  Roman  law, 
but  unlike  the  Roman  concept  it  had  no  concrete  existence.  The 
Jewish  contribution  was  that  of  the  'chosen  people,'  'the  elect 
nation.'  These  four  concepts  were  transferred  from  their  original 
loci  to  the  Christian  society.  The  fact  that  all  of  these  concepts  were 
combined  and  centered  on  the  same  social  group  and  the  further 
fact  that  each  of  these  concepts  supplemented  the  others  in  a  remark- 
able way  resulted  in  the  formation  of  one  of  the  most  powerful  ideas 
in  religious  history. 

This  Church  concept,  thus  built  up,  had  already  become  wide- 
spread in  the  time  of  Augustine  and  this  fact  helps  us  to  understand 
the  otherwise  unintelligible  success  of  that  saint  in  combatting 
Chiliasm.  The  real  truth  is  seen  to  be  that  Augustine's  ideas  suc- 
ceeded because  they  were  not  peculiarly  his  at  all — they  already 
existed,  implicitly  but  really,  in  the  mind  of  the  generation  which  he 
addressed.     The  elements  of  the  concept  'the  Church'  being  what 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  21 

they  were,  Augustine's  explanation  of,  or  rather  aboHtion  of,  Chiliasm 
follows  of  inevitable  logical  and  intellectual  necessity.  It  was  the 
genius  of  Augustine  that  he  recognized  and  gave  formulated,  concrete 
expression  to  this  accomplished  fact  and  it  is  no  derrogation  of  his 
genius  to  say  that  had  he  never  existed  the  accomplished  fact  would 
eventually  have  been  given  expression  to  by  some  one  else. 

Another  little  considered  element  in  Chiliasm  is  that  of  masoch- 
ism, and  sadism,  the  two  being  merely  the  opposite  sides  of  the  same 
psychical  phenomenon.  This  element  is  found  more  or  less  promi- 
nently in  all  the  Chiliastic  literature  from  the  early  fragment  of 
Papias  to  the  elaborate  discussions  of  Augustine.  The  masochistic 
phenomena  are  the  most  remarkable  characteristics  of  the  early 
martyrdoms  and  if  a  collection  were  made  of  the  masochistic  passages 
of  the  writings  of  the  Chiliasts,  the  bulk  of  them  would  be  as  great 
as  that  of  the  Chiliastic  passages  proper. 

It  is  necessary  to  bear  in  mind  that  masochism  necessarily,  in 
any  advanced  society,  disguises  itself  under  some  socially  acceptable 
form  of  sentiment  or  emotion,  i.e.,  admiration  for  the  constancy  of 
the  confessors  or  martyrs,  suffering  as  a  mark  of  the  true  Church, 
etc.  It  is  always  associated  with  the  reality  or  idea  of  struggle. 
It  has  a  high  'survival  value'  in  the  struggle  for  existence  by  heighten- 
ing individual  power  in  conflict.  Like  other  human  characteris- 
tics it  is  seen  most  clearly  in  the  exaggerated  form  it  assumes  in  its 
crowd  manifestations.  Its  most  evident  expression  is  in  the  'mob 
mind.'  Our  problem,  then,  is  to  discover  how  the  declension  of 
Chiliasm  is  to  be  explained  by  the  transfer  of  the  masochistic  element 
in  it  to  other  vehicles  of  expression.  The  masochistic  element  was  a 
vital  factor  in  ChiHasm;  without  it  almost  the  whole  force  of  'the 
thousand  years  reign  of  the  saints'  is  lost.  The  explanation  of  the 
transfer  is  difficult.  Undoubtedly  some  of  the  masochistic  values 
of  Chiliasm  were  taken  over  by  the  various,  previously  mentioned 
concepts  that  combined  to  make  up  the  idea  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
'Extra  ecclesia  nulla  salus'  accounts  for  part  of  the  phenomena 
previously  expressed  Chiliastically.  It  is  notable  in  this  connection 
that  there  is  no  word  of  Chiliasm  in  Cyprian.  But  a  more  important 
transfisr  was  that  which  took  place  in  the  course  of  the  development 
of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory.  It  may  perhaps  seem  incongruous  to 
say  that  purgatory  took  over  the  values  of  the  millennium  and  from 


22  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

the  point  of  view  of  formal  theology  it  is  so.  But  the  only  point  we 
are  trying  to  make  here,  namely,  the  fundamental  fact  of  the  expres- 
sion of  masochistic  impulses,  is  as  evidently  shown  in  the  purgatory 
as  in  the  millennium  concept.  The  desire  for  a  heightened  sense  of 
self-realization,  a  richer  content  of  experience,  is  the  cause  of  the 
appearance  of  both  concepts  and  they  are  closely  allied  psychologically. 
This  fact  comes  out  in  the  large  part  played  by  the  Chiliasts  in  the 
evolution  of  the  purgatory  concept.^^  What  we  find  here  is  a  con- 
current declension  of  Chiliasm  and  development  of  purgatory.  For 
about  two  centuries  the  two  concepts  existed  side  by  side;  then  the 
superior  social  value  of  purgatory  asserting  itself,  that  doctrine 
gradually  took  over  the  masochistic  values  of  Chiliasm;  the  super- 
session of  the  later  being  rendered  thereby  more  rapid  and  easy. 

However  it  is  probably  that  the  transfer  of  the  psychological 
values  from  Chiliasm  was  more  to  be  ascribed  to  the  rising  asceticism 
of  the  early  Church  thau  to  the  concept  of  the  Church  as  such,  or 
even  to  the  rise  of  the  purgatory  concept.     Asceticism  in  some  form 
is  a  permanent  element  in  any  wide  spread  religion  and  the  values 
laterexpressedinChristianasceticism  were  in  the  earlier  period  me- 
diated through  ChiHasm.      When  St.  Paul  advocated  abstinence  from 
marriage  '  because  the  time  is  short'  he  was  not  expressing  asceticism. 
He  was  expressing  a  sensible  idea  based  on  belief  in  one  of  the  chief 
Chiliastic  doctrines,  the  immediate  imminence  of  the  Second  Advent. 
In  the  case  of  such  teachers  as  Tertullian  the  doctrine  of  marriage 
is  the  result  of  a  combination  of   Chiliasm  and   asceticism.     At  a 
later  date  asceticism  took  over  the  doctrine  of  celibacy  as  meritorious 
on  its  own  account  but  it  never  outgrew  the  original  Chiliastic  view 
that  it  was  a  logical  preparation  for  the  Second  Advent.     In  other 
words  restriction  in  matrimony  whether  Chilastic  or  monastic  is  due 
to  the  same  inherent  element  in  human  nature,  i.e.,  the  masochistic. 
Similarly  those  good  Phrygian  Chiliasts  who  abandoned  all  their 
possessions  and  went  out  into  the  desert  to  meet  the  Lord  were 
moved  by  the  same  psychological  impulse  that  actuated  the  monks 
of  the  Thebaid.     Historically  the  one  set  of  concepts  imperceptibly 
gave  way  to  the  other.     Those  same  Thebaid  monks  are  a  good 
illustration  of  the  fact.     Some  of  them,  at  least  in  the  earlier  stages 

^  Clem.  Alex.  Paed.,  iii,  Strom.  VII.    Origen,  Hom.  on  Num.,  XXV.    Hem.  on 
Ps.  XXVI.    Lactantius,  VII,  20. 


POLITICAL  THEORIES  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANS  23 

of  the  movement,  were  influenced  more  by  Chilastic  concepts  than 
by  monastic  ones.  Many  were  influenced  by  both.  Here  again 
the  superior  value  of  the  ascetic  concepts  for  the  ecclesiastical  organi- 
zation determined  the  eventual  survival  of  the  monastic  institution. 
But  whatever  the  conceptual  images  employed  to  give  expression 
to  the  masochistic  impulse,  that  impulse  was  psychologically  the 
same.  Organized  monachism  furnished  a  more  convenient  outlet 
for  the  stronger  masochistic  impulses  than  Chiliasm  and  so  super- 
seded it.  The  fact  that  monachism  grew  in  proportion  as  Chiliasm 
declined  is  in  this  respect  merely  a  case  of  trans-shipment.  The 
vehicle  was  different  but  the  goods  carried  were  the  same. 

There  are  numerous  other  social  and  psychological,  as  well  as 
economic  causes  for  the  declension  of  Chiliasm  but  they  can  perhaps 
be  more  conveniently  considered  in  connection  with  the  socialization 
of  the  earlv  Church. 


C 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS 

The  Chiliasm  of  the  early  Christians  had  a  direct  bearing  upon 
their  attitude  toward  the  property  institutions  and  property  con- 
cepts of  the  time.  Neither  the  declension  of  Chiliasm  nor  the  pro- 
gressive socialization  of  the  Church  can  be  understood  without  some 
consideration  of  the  attitude  of  the  Christians  toward  property,  and 
conversely  the  effect  of  the  existing  economic  system  upon  the 
Christians. 

The  early  Church  made  its  appearance  in  a  world  where  the 
institution  of  private  property  was  supreme  in  fact  and  very  largely 
unquestioned  in  theory.  It  is  recognized  with  perfect  clearness  by 
all  the  ancient  thinkers  who  refer  to  the  subject  that  their  civilization 
was  based  upon  the  property  rights  of  man  in  man.  It  is  not  true 
that  slavery  was  invariably  considered  part  of  the  unalterable  law 
of  nature.  Aristotle  expressly  states  that  a  sufiScient  development  of 
mechanistic  technology  would  abrogate  slavery.  But  such  a  techno- 
logical development  was  not  expected  nor  indeed  wished  for.  Con- 
tempt for  mechanical  processes  of  industry  was  universal,  with  the 
dubious  exception  of  the  application  of  science  to  military  engines. 
There  is  a  similar  unanimity  in  regard  to  commercial  enterprise. 
Money  obtained  by  ordinary  mercantile  methods  was  considered  as 
dishonestly  acquired.  It  was  assumed  as  self-evident  that  the 
merchant  had  to  be  a  thief.  Interest  on  money  was  of  course  repro- 
bated as  contrary  to  nature.^  Return  from  landed  property  was 
almost  the  only  socially  reputable  form  of  income — with  the  excep- 
tion of  spoils  of  war.  Free  wage  labor  was  so  unimportant  that  the 
Roman  law  did  not  even  develop  a  set  of  legal  principles  regarding  it. 

The  Jewish  property  system,  which  originally  had  some  notable 
peculiarities  of  its  own,  had  by  the  first  century  a.d.  become  of 
necessity  so  like  the  Roman  that  the  differences  may  for  our  purposes 
be  disregarded.  The  more  so  as  Christianity  very  early  came  almost 
exclusively  under  the  influence  of  the  Roman  institutions  and  con- 
cepts in  this  regard.     It  is  perhaps  unnecessary  to  add  that  Roman 

>  Cf.  Plato,  Laws,  V,  742.  Aristotle,  Politics,  1  :X,  XI.  Cicero,  De  Officus,  II, 
XXV.     Seneca,  De  Beneficus,  VII,  X. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  25 

practice  in  regard  to  property  was  widely  at  variance  with  Roman 
theory,  with  the  result  that  serious  moral  disintegration  came  over 
persons  engaging  in  commercial  enterprises.  The  moral  lapses  of 
the  early  Christians  arc  largely  to  be  set  down  to  this  cause,  on  the 
principle  that  a  destruction  of  moral  integrity  in  one  respect  makes 
other  delinquencies  easy. 

With  respect  to  the  attitude  of  Christ  towards  contemporary 
property  institutions,  it  is  unnecessary  for  our  purpose  to  regard  any 
conclusions  of  modern  criticism.  The  synoptic  gospels  were  uncriti- 
cally accepted  by  the  early  Church  and  we  are  concerned  merely 
with  what  was  commonly  accepted  as  the  teaching  of  Christ. 

Perhaps  as  convenient  a  way  as  any  of  illustrating  the  breadth 
of  view  in  Christ's  attitude  toward  property  institutions  would  be  to 
take  a  single  illustration  and  apply  to  it  the  whole  range  of  property 
concepts  found  in  the  teachings  of  Christ.  No  single  illustration 
is  so  applied  in  the  Gospels  as  we  have  them,  but  the  principles  will 
be  the  clearer  for  the  consistent  use  of  the  same  illustration.  We 
shall  take  as  our  type  case  one  which  Christ  himself  used;  the  case 
of  a  thief  who  steals  a  coat.  The  teachings  of  Christ  about  property 
can  conveniently  be  put  down  under  four  heads,  each  illustrating, 
by  a  different  way  of  treating  the  thief,  a  different  property  concept. 

First:  The  ordinary  or  conventional  manner  of  treating  the 
thief,  based  on  the  concept  of  the  morality  and  sacredness  of  private 
property;  i.e.,  catching  the  thief,  recovering  the  stolen  property  and 
punishing  the  crime  by  fine  or  imprisonment  or  torture.  This  con- 
ventional standard  of  morality  and  attitude  towards  property  is 
illustrated,  e.g.,  in  the  story  of  the  man  with  one  talent  in  the  parable. 
It  is  very  concisely  summed  up  in  the  expression:  "To  him  that 
hath  shall  be  given  and  he  shall  have  abundance  and  from  him  that 
hath  not  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  which  he  hath." 

Second:  What  may  be  called  for  convenience  the  socialistic  man- 
ner of  treating  the  thief — no  implications  either  good  or  bad  being 
intended  by  the  use  of  the  term  socialistic.  This  treatment  would 
consist  of  catching  the  thief,  recovering  the  stolen  property  but  letting 
the  thief  go  free  with  merely  an  admonition  to  future  good  behavior. 
This  treatment  is  based  on  the  concept  that  the  institution  of  private 
property  has  only  a  partial  validity  and  that  violations  of  private 
property  rights  are  to  be  blamed  not  alone  upon  the  violator  but 


26  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

upon  society  at  large  in  equal  degree.  This  attitude  is  illustrated  in 
the  case  of  the  woman  taken  in  adultery:  "Neither  do  I  condemn 
thee;  go  and  sin  no  more."  The  illustration  is  perhaps  more  apt  than 
appears  at  first  glance  for  female  chastity  is  and  was  legally  possessed 
of  tangible  economic  value  i.e.,  adultery  was  viewed  as  a  violation  of 
a  property  right  belonging  to  the  husband  of  the  adultress. 

Third:  What  may  be  termed  the  anarchistic  manner  of  treating 
the  thief — here  again  no  implications  either  good  or  bad  are  intended 
by  the  employment  of  the  term  anarchistic.  This  treatment  consists 
essentially  in  pacificism,  in  Tolstoi's  non-resistance.  It  is  purely 
negative  and  allows  the  thief  to  get  away  with  the  stolen  coat  without 
anyone  making  any  move  to  recover  the  property.  This  treatment  is 
based  on  the  concept  that  private  property  institutions  have  no 
validity  at  all,  but  that  the  only  valid  property  arrangement  is  that  of 
pure  communism.  This  attitude  toward  property  is  illustrated  by 
such  sayings  of  Christ  as  "Of  him  that  taketh  away  thy  goods  ask 
them  not  again;"  "Resist  not  him  that  is  evil,"  etc. 

Fourth:  What  may  be  distinguished  as  the  specifically  Christain 
manner  of  treating  the  thief — using  the  word  Christian  as  apper- 
taining strictly  to  the  founder  of  the  Church.  This  treatment  consists 
of  running  after  the  thief  not  for  the  purpose  of  capturing  and  punish- 
ing him;  not  even  for  the  purpose  of  recovering  the  stolen  coat  but  for 
the  pupose  of  giving  him  a  vest  and  an  overcoat  in  addition  to  what 
he  has  stolen.  It  amounts  to  the  direct  encouragement  and  reward 
of  the  thief  for  doing  what  is  presumably  a  meritorious  action  by 
stealing.  This  way  of  treating  a  thief  is  not  socialistic,  or  communis- 
tic; it  is  not  even  anarchistic.  It  is  something  as  far  beyond  anarchy, 
as  anarchy  is  beyond  socialism,  or  socialism  beyond  ordinary  conven- 
tional individualism.  It  is  specifically  and  peculiarly  and  uniquely 
Christian,  using  that  word  as  above  defined.  This  treatment  is  not 
based  on  any  concept  of  any  kind  of  property  institution.  Its  logical, 
intellectual  position  is  the  denial  of  the  validity  or  worth  of  any 
property  institutions,  private  or  communistic.  It  involves  indeed 
the  destruction  of  the  very  concept  property  as  implying  possession 
by  right  of  social  agreement.  This  attitude  of  Christ  toward  property 
finds  expression  in  such  sayings  as:  "  From  him  that  taketh  away  thy 
cloke  withhold  not  thy  coat  also."  "Blessed  are  ye  poor."  "Woe 
unto  you  that  are  rich."    It  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through  the 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  27 

eye  of  a  needle,  etc.  etc.  The  great  bulk  of  Christ's  statements  about 
property  are  to  be  classified  under  this  fourth  head.  The  views  are 
probably  connected,  with  just  what  degree  of  closeness  it  is  impossible 
to  say,  to  the  belief  in  the  immediately  imminent  catastrophe  of  the 
world.  With  somewhat  less  certainty,  it  may  be  ventured  that 
certain  of  Christ's  sayings  which  we  have  listed  as  anarchistic  are 
perhaps  influenced  by  the  same  idea. 

It  is  of  course  obvious  that  the  above  four  fold  division  is  not 
exact  in  the  strict  scientific  sense,  or  that  any  teaching  of  Christ  con- 
cerning property  can  be  unhesitatingly  classified  under  one  head  or 
another.  Still  less  is  anything  intended  to  be  implied  as  to  the 
existence  or  non-existence  of  any  underlying,  universal,  theological 
principle  which  would  reconcile  apparent  divergencies.  Theological 
metaphysics  as  such,  lie  outside  the  scope  of  this  chapter  which  is 
intended  as  an  objective  study  of  concepts  of  property.  From  an 
objective  point  of  view  it  is  evident  that  the  four  divisions  imper- 
ceptibly shade  into  one  another  and  form  a  continuous  series, 
nevertheless  for  the  sake  of  convenience  it  may  be  considered  as 
approximating  a  rational  organization  of  the  material  under  distinct 
heads. 

Immediately  after  the  time  of  Christ  the  Christians  in  Jerusalem 
developed  a  communistic  organization.  "All  that  believed  were 
together  and  had  all  things  in  common  and  sold  their  possessions  and 
goods  and  parted  them  to  all  men,  as  every  man  had  need."  "  Neither 
said  any  of  them  that  ought  of  the  things  which  he  possessed  was  his 
own;  but  they  had  all  things  common.  Neither  was  there  any  among 
them  that  lacked;  for  as  many  as  were  possessors  of  lands  or  houses 
sold  them,  and  brought  the  prices  of  the  things  that  were  sold  and 
laid  them  at  the  apostles'  feet;  and  distribution  was  made  unto  every 
man  according  as  he  had  need."^ 

It  is  doubtless  true  that  the  participants  in  this  communistic 
society  believed  themselves  to  be  living  according  to  the  principles 
and  precepts  of  Christ.  Yet  there  is  some  evidence  which  would  lead 
to  the  conclusion  that  perhaps  this  experiment  was  less  a  deliberate 
and  reasoned  out  endeavor  to  organize  a  permanent  society  on  a  new 
economic  basis,  than  an  instinctive  movement,  entered  upon  under 
the  influence  of  a  belief  in  the  immediately  imminent  second  advent 

2  Acts  IV. 


28  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

of  Christ  and  therefore  expected  to  be  of  only  very  limited  duration. 
The  collections  subsequently  taken  up  in  other  Christian  communities 
'for  the  relief  of  the  poor  saints  in  Jerusalem'  would  seem  to  lend 
color  to  this  view  of  the  matter. 

In  St.  Paul's  teaching  about  property  there  is  a  fundamental 
inconsistency.  He  makes  statements  which  taken  separately  are 
applicable  to  particular  situations  but  which  are  not  in  harmony  with 
one  another.  He  loyally  supported  the  established  right  of  private 
property,  even  in  slaves.  But  at  another  time  he  pronounced  that 
property  right  depended  upon  service  rendered.  In  one  place  we 
have:  "  Slaves  obey  your  masters"  in  another:  "  If  any  will  not  work 
neither  let  him  eat."  But  if  a  man's  slaves  obey  him  he  can  eat 
without  working.  There  is  no  suggestion  of  communism  in  St. 
Paul's  writings.  If  all  the  'property  passages'  in  the  epistles  are 
collected  and  read  in  connection  with  their  contexts  two  facts  come 
into  prominence,  First:  Property  institutions  as  such  have  only  a 
relative  validity.  They  are  not  viewed  as  ends  valuable  in  themselves 
but  are  subordinated  to  religious  ends,  and  the  concept  of  an  imme- 
diately imminent  second  advent  lies  at  the  base  of  this  relative 
valuation.'  Second:  Economic  arrangements  of  the  existing  social 
order,  like  similar  political  arrangements,  are  to  be  strictly  conformed 
to,  in  spite  of  their  merely  relative  validity,  for  fear  of  jeopardizing 
the  more  important  religious  movement.'*  St.  Paul  whether 
consciously  or  not,  is,  in  regard  to  social  institutions,  an  evolutionary 
revolutionist.  He  would  doubtless  have  been  the  first  to  admit  that 
his  doctrine  of  human  brotherhood,  for  example,  would  eventually 
overthrow  his  doctrine  of  slavery,  supposing — as  there  is  no  ground 
for  thinking  he  did  suppose — that  time  enough  elapsed  for  his  doctrine 
of  brotherhood  to  permeate  the  general  social  consciousness.  In  so 
far  as  property  concepts  are  concerned  it  would  probably  be  difficult 
to  maintain  that  there  is  any  essential  divergence  between  the 
teachings  of  St.  Paul  and  some  at  least  of  the  teachings  of  Christ. 
St.  Paul  was  by  nature  an  ecclesiastical  statesman.  He  seems  to 
have  taken  such  of  Christ's  property  concepts  as  served  his  purposes 
and  ignored  the  others. 

3 1.  Cor.  vii  30. 
*  Rom.  xiii  3. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  29 

In  the  epistle  of  St.  James  are  to  be  found  very  bitter  complaints 
as  to  the  working  of  property  institutions.  These  complaints  are 
so  serious  as  to  suggest  the  inevitable  attempt  to  make  over  the 
institutions  and  the  fact  that  no  such  attempt  is  indicated  is  due 
to  the  manifestly  lively  expectation  of  the  second  advent.  Yet  even 
so  it  was  necessary  for  the  writer  to  council  patience  to  his  brethren.^ 

In  the  Revelation  there  is  a  passage,  xviii,  12  seq.,  quite  in  the 
manner  of  the  most  violent  of  the  ancient  prophets  or  the  modern 
anarchists.  In  this  passage  property  is  conceived  as  evil  and  the 
destruction  of  civilization  as  it  then  was,  is  conceived  as  a  cause  of 
rejoicing  to  saints,  apostles,  and  prophets.  On  the  other  hand  the 
New  Jerusalem  in  the  same  book^  is  a  'wholesale  jewelers  paradise' 
and  involves  the  property  concepts  of  those  cities  of  Asia  Minor  who 
did  most  of  the  jewelry  manufacturing  of  the  Roman  Empire.  It  is 
very  doubtful  how  far  anything  in  such  a  description  can  be  said  to 
embody  property  concepts  but  the  ideal  put  forth  is  the  communistic 
enjoyment  of  incredible  luxury. 

The  epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  has  only  incidental  references  to 
property.  They  can  be  well  summed  up  in  the  quotation:^  "Let  the 
rich  man  provide  for  the  wants  of  the  poor;  and  let  the  poor  man 
bless  God,  because  He  hath  given  him  one  by  whom  his  need  may 
be  supplied."  There  is  manifestly  no  question  of  tampering  with 
received  property  institutions  and  concepts  on  the  part  of  the  writer 
of  such  a  sentence.  It  is  equally  evident  that  such  an  attitude  in 
regard  to  property  is  eminently  well  calculated  to  enable  the  holder 
to  propagate  specifically  theological  opinions  with  a  minimum  of 
interested  opposition. 

The  Didache  holds  a  naive  and  touching  communistic  creed.* 
"Thou  shalt  not  turn  away  from  him  that  hath  need  but  shalt  share 
all  things  with  thy  brother  and  shalt  not  say  that  they  are  thine 
own."  This  passage,  the  only  one  on  the  subject  in  the  Didache, 
would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  institution  of  private  property 
existed  as  a  matter  of  fact  in  the  writer's  community,  but  that  the 

'  Jas.     Chap.  V. 
•Chaps.  21-22. 
^  Chap,  xxxviii. 
« Did.  IV.  8. 


30  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

validity  of  it  was  not  acknowledged.  The  position  may  perhaps  be 
called  one  of  conceptual  and  constructive  communism. 

The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  holds  exactly  the  same  view  in  almost 
exactly  the  same  words :^  "Thou  shalt  communicate  to  thy  neighbor 
all  that  thou  hast,  thou  shalt  not  call  anything  thine  own." 

Early  in  the  second  century  we  come  upon  the  Ebionites  who  in 
the  matter  of  property  held  very  strong  views.^'^  The  stricter  of 
them  made  poverty  a  condition  of  salvation.  They  refused  to 
acknowledge  the  validity  of  the  concept  property — that  is  in  theory. 
In  practice  some  of  them  seem  to  have  been  influenced  by  the  doctrine 
and  practice  of  the  Essenes  in  regard  to  communism. 

All  through  the  second  century  we  find  a  continuous  succession 
of  heretical  sects,  Gnostics  and  others,  who  held  either  the  doctrine 
of  the  wickedness  of  property-ownership  as  such,  'holy  poverty,' 
or  else  objected  to  individual  ownership  of  property  and  preached 
or  practiced  communism  in  such  degree  as  might  be  possible  under 
the  circumstances.  Of  these  sects  it  is  sufficient  to  name  the  Mar- 
cionites  110  a.d.  The  Carpocratians  135  a.d.  The  Procidians 
160  a.d.(?)  The  Basilidians  138  a.d.  It  is  evident  that  there  was 
in  progress  in  the  second  century  an  ascetic  movement  which  later 
took  on  the  forms  of  Manichaeism  and  Christian  asceticism.  The 
Church  consistently  opposed  all  these  sects  and  maintained  the 
validity  of  private  property  without  condemning  communism  as 
such,  except  in  extreme  cases,  such  as  that  of  Epiphanes  of  Alexan- 
dria, a  Carpocriation,  who  in  a  book  on  Justice,  125  a.d.,  defined 
virtue  as  consisting  in  absolute  communism  of  goods  and  women. 

To  return  to  orthodox  Christianity,  Hermas  shows  very  clearly 
the  inconsistencies  which  beset  Christian  theory  and  practice  in  the 
first  half  of  the  second  century.  All  who  are  rich  must  be  deprived 
of  their  wealth  in  order  to  be  good  Christians. ^^  Yet  this  deprivation 
of  wealth  must  be  only  relative;  there  must  be  wealth  enough  left 
for  the  giving  of  alms.^^  There  is  no  trace  of  communism  in  Hermas 
and  no  praise  of  poverty  as  such.  The  chief  justification  for  the 
existence  of  property  institutions  would  seem  to  be  that  they  are 

» Barn.  XIV.  16. 

1"  Schaff,  Vol.  1. 

"  Past.  V.  vi.  6. 

^  Past.  S.  IX.  XXX.  5. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  31 

social  Structures  which  can  be  utiHzed  for  the  giving  and  receiving 
of  alms.  Perhaps  one  paragraph  is  worth  quoting  as  giving  possibly 
the  earliest  formulation  extant  of  the  property  concepts  that  finally 
became  dominant.  "The  rich  man  has  much  wealth  but  is  poor  in 
matters  relating  to  the  Lord  because  he  is  distracted  about  his  riches 
and  he  offers  very  few  confessions  and  intercessions  to  the  Lord  and 
those  which  he  does  offer  are  small  and  weak,  and  have  no  power 
above.  But  when  the  rich  man  refreshes  the  poor  and  assists  him 
in  his  necessities,  believing  that  which  he  does  to  the  poor  man  will 
be  able  to  find  its  reward  with  God — because  the  poor  man  is  rich 
in  intercessions  and  confession  and  his  intercession  has  great  power 
with  God — then  the  rich  man  helps  the  poor  in  all  things  without 
hesitation;  and  the  poor  man,  being  helped  by  the  rich,  intercedes 
for  him,  giving  thanks  to  God  for  him  who  bestows  gifts  upon  him. 
And  he  still  continues  earnestly  to  interest  himself  for  the  poor  man, 
that  his  want  may  be  constantly  supplied.  For  he  knows  that  the 
intercession  of  the  poor  man  is  acceptable  and  influential  with  God. 
Both  accordingly  accomplish  their  work.  The  poor  man  makes 
intercession;  a  work  in  which  he  is  rich,  which  he  received  from  the 
Lord,  and  with  which  he  recompenses  the  master  who  helps  him. 
And  the  rich  man  in  like  manner,  unhesitatingly  bestows  upon  the 
poor  man  the  riches  which  he  received  from  the  Lord.  And  this  is 
a  great  work  and  acceptable  before  God,  because  he  understands  the 
object  of  his  wealth  and  has  given  to  the  poor  of  the  gifts  of  the  Lord 
and  rightly  discharged  his  service  to  Him.^^ 

The  inconsistent  and  irreconciliable  nature  of  the  evidence  about 
early  Christian  property  institutions  is  well  illustrated  in  Justin 
Martyr.  Two  short  extracts  are  sufficient  for  the  purpose.  "We 
who  valued  above  all  things  the  acquisition  of  wealth  and  possessions, 
now  bring  what  we  have  into  a  common  stock  and  communicate  to 
every  one  in  need."^*  "We  carry  on  us  all  we  possess  and  share 
everything  with  the  poor."'^ 

The  second  of  these  passages  would  indicate  that  the  first  is  not 
to  be  taken  in  a  too  literal  and  comprehensive  sense.  It  may  perhaps 
be  ventured  as  an  opinion  that  the  truth  of  the  matter,  as  regards  the 

"  Past  III.  2. 
"  Apol.  I.  IV. 
"  Apol.  I.  xiv. 


32  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

Christians  of  whom  Justin  wrote,  is  that  the  concept  of  private  pro- 
perty was  largely  invalidated  and  that  personal  possessions  were 
thought  of  as  owned  in  common  while  the  'common  stock'  consisted 
in  reality  of  contributions — it  may  be  large  contributions — given  for 
the  relief  of  necessity  among  the  members. 

The  account  preserved  to  us  in  Lucian  of  the  Christian  com- 
munities of  Judea  in  the  later  half  of  the  second  Century  would  seem 
to  bear  out  this  opinion.  Lucian  says:  "The  activity  of  these  people 
in  dealing  with  any  matter  that  affects  their  community  is  something 
extraordinary.  They  spare  no  trouble,  no  expense.  Peregrine  all 
this  time  was  making  quite  an  income  on  the  strength  of  his  bondage. 
Money  came  pouring  in.  You  see  these  misguided  creatures  start 
with  the  general  conviction  that  they  are  immortal  for  all  time,  which 
explains  the  contempt  of  death  and  voluntary  self  devotion  which  are 
so  common  among  them  and  then  it  was  impressed  upon  them  by 
their  original  law  giver  that  they  are  all  brothers  from  the  moment 
that  they  are  converted  and  deny  the  gods  of  Greece  and  worship 
the  crucified  sage  and  live  after  his  laws.  All  this  they  take  quite  on 
trust  with  the  result  that  they  despise  all  worldly  goods  alike,  regard- 
ing them  merely  as  common  property."^® 

In  Tertullian  we  find  the  same  contradiction  as  regards  private 
ownership  and  communism  which  has  already  been  noted  in  Justin. 
The  contradiction  is  more  glaring,  but  possibly  the  explanation  of  the 
real  situation  is  similar.  The  following  two  extracts  from  the  same 
chapter  bring  this  contradiction  out  in  high  relief:  "Family  posses- 
sions which  generally  destroy  brotherhood  among  you,  create 
fraternal  bonds  among  us.  One  in  mind  and  soul,  we  do  not  hesitate 
to  share  our  earthly  goods  with  one  another.  All  things  are  common 
among  us  but  our  wives."  "On  the  monthly  collection  day,  if  he  likes, 
each  puts  in  a  small  donation;  but  only  if  it  be  his  pleasure  and  only 
if  he  be  able,  for  there  is  no  compulsion,  all  is  voluntary. "^^ 

Tertullian  was  a  Montanist  and  one  of  the  most  serious  charges 
made  against  the  Montanists  was  that  some  of  their  prophets  received 
interest  on  money  loaned  by  them.^^  Tertullian  is  above  suspicion 
in  this  respect.     He  demonstrates  by  quotations  from  both  the  Old 

i«  De  Mort.  Per.  XIV. 
"Apol.  XXXIX. 
"Eus.,  E.  H.,  V.  18. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  33 

and  New  Testaments  that  it  is  absolutely  contradictory  to  Chris- 
tianity. Interest  on  money  is  the  only  property  institution  in  regard 
to  which  the  teaching  of  the  early  Church  is  consistent.  Every 
reference  we  have  in  regard  to  this  practice  condemns  it — not  mildly 
as  a  venial  offense — but  fiercely  and  savagely  as  a  heinous  crime 
like  incest  or  murder.  "  Fenerare  est  hominem  occidere"  is  a  favorite 
formula.  In  this  respect  the  most  pronounced  apologists  of  private 
wealth  like  Clement  of  Alexandria  are  in  perfect  accord  with  the  most 
pronounced  communists  like  TertulUan.  The  only  diflference  to  be 
noted  is  one  of  emphasis.  In  the  earlier  writers  there  are  relatively  few 
references  to  interest,  which  may  perhpas  be  due  to  the  fact  that  in 
the  earlier  time  there  were  relatively  few  Christians  possessed  of 
surplus  means  requiring  investment.  As  might  naturally  be  expected, 
the  writers  of  the  period  after  the  estabUshment  of  Christianity  as  a 
legal  religion  make  more  frequent  and  more  bitter  reference  to  the 
matter.  The  vehemence  of  denunciation  indulged  in  by  these  later 
writers  almost  exceeds  credibility.  The  most  improbable  and  strained 
exegesis  is  resorted  to  in  an  effort  to  explain  away  the  words  of  Christ 
in  the  parables  of  the  pounds  and  talents.  But  this  vehemence  is  by 
no  means  confined  to  the  Nicene  and  post-Nicene  fathers.  So 
statesmanlike  a  bishop  as  Cyprian,  in  a  long  railing  accusation  against 
certain  opposition  bishops  brings  forth  as  their  final  sin  that  they  had 
"multiplied  gain  by  usury. "^^  Usury  is  not  to  be  taken,  of  course, 
in  its  present  sense  of  excessive  or  burdensome  interest  and  it  is 
evident  that  Cyprian  did  not  use  it  in  such  a  sense.  He  is  simply 
condeming  interest  as  such.  In  the  minds  of  the  early  Christians  the 
difference  between  taking  five  percent  interest  or  fifty  percent  was 
exactly  the  same  as  the  difference  between  stealing  one  dollar  or  ten. 
The  sin  was  essentially  the  same  irrespective  of  the  particular  amount 
involved.  Indeed  this  comparison  is  scarcely  a  valid  one;  for  taking 
interest  was  conceived  as  a  much  worse  sin  than  plain  robbery.  It 
is  perhaps  worth  noting  that  the  moral  distinction  between  interest 
and  usury  is  of  very  late  development.  The  credit,  if  it  be  such,  of 
making  it,  is  to  be  ascribed  to  Calvin  and  is  not  unconnected  with  the 
prediliction  of  certain  types  of  pecuniary  interest  for  that  reformer's 
system  of  eccHastical  poUty.  The  Roman  law  did  indeed  fix  a 
maximum  legal  rate  of  interest,  varying  at  different  times  and  even 
'•  De  Lapsis,  VI. 


34  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

at  the  same  time  for  different  forms  of  commercial  risk.  During  the 
first  three  centuries  a.d.  it  was,  for  example,  consistently  twelve 
percent  on  ships  and  varied  from  six  to  twelve  percent  on  other  forms 
of  investment.    But  this  has  little  moral  connotation. 

Early  Christian  condemnation  of  interest  on  loans  was  by  no 
means  confined  to  the  expression  of  opinion  by  church  writers. 
Council  after  council  legislated  against  it  with  ever  increasing 
severity.  The  forty-fourth  Apostolic  Canon  prohibited  the  practice 
to  clerics.  The  Council  of  Elvira  310  a.d.  forbade  it  to  both  clerics 
and  laity.  The  Council  of  Aries  314  a.d.  provided  that  clerics  guilty 
of  the  practice  should  be  deposed  from  the  ministry.  The  seven- 
teenth canon  of  the  Council  of  Nicea  325  a.d.  provided  that  they 
should  be  excommunicated.  The  penalty  is  reiterated  in  the  twelfth 
canon  of  the  First  Council  of  Carthage  345  a.d.  There  is  no  need  to 
continue  the  list.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  nearly  every  council 
whose  canons  have  come  down  to  us  has  legislation  against  interest. 
Again  and  again  it  is  absolutely  forbidden  to  clergy  and  laity  alike 
under  the  severest  ecclesiastical  penalties — and  it  is  necessary  to 
remember  that  after  325  a.d.  these  penalties  could,  if  need  be,  be 
enforced  by  governmental  authority. 

This  attitude  of  the  early  Church  toward  interest  on  loans  is  a 
matter  of  very  considerable  historical  importance.  Although,  as  we 
shall  endeavor  to  show  later,  the  ecclesiastical  laws  were  frequently 
and  largely  evaded,  they  still  had  such  influence  that  their  contri- 
bution to  the  sum  of  economic  forces  which  accomplished  the  over- 
throw of  ancient  civilization  is  by  no  means  an  insignificant  one. 
Nor  did  the  influence  of  this  attitude  cease  at  the  fall  of  Rome.  It 
rather  increased  thereafter  and  for  several  centuries,  the  so-called 
"Dark  Ages,"  civilization  was  strangled  by  the  power  of  this  idea 
of  the  sin  of  usury.  To  this  day  the  Roman  Church  regards  interest 
on  money  as  a  reprehensible  thing  which,  however,  is  not,  for  practical 
reasons,  to  be  spoken  of  as  sinful  by  the  clergy.^"  This  attitude  has 
been  no  inconsiderable  factor  in  the  relatively  late  industrial  develop- 
ment in  Catholic  countries. 

The  early  Christian  concept  of  interest  was  not  an  idea  original 
with  Christianity.  It  was  not  derived  from  Christ  at  all.  It  was 
taken  over  bodily  from  Old  Testament  Judaism  and  contemporary 

^"  See  Pronouncement  of  the  Sacred  Penitentiary,  11  Feb.,  1832. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  35 

pagan  philosophy.  It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  the  views  of  Plato  and 
Aristotle,  of  Cicero  and  Seneca  on  interest,  correspond  in  a  very 
astonishing  way  to  the  views  of  Deuteronomy  and  Isaiah,  of  the 
Psalms  and  Ezekiel.  The  strength  of  the  concept  in  the  early  Church 
was  due  to  this  fact.  In  regard  to  no  other  concept  was  there  such  a 
unanimity  of  opinion.  The  Christian  convert  found  that  the  sacred 
scriptures  of  his  new  faith  confirmed  in  the  strongest  language  the 
condemnation  of  interest  which  he  had  become  familiar  with  from 
the  writings  of  the  noblest  pagan  philosophers.  When  reason  and 
religion  were  in  accord  it  is  not  wonderful  that  their  judgment  was 
accepted — as  a  theory. 

In  spite  of  this  union  of  pagan  philosophers  and  Hebrew  prophets, 
of  Christian  Fathers  and  Ecclesiastical  Canons,  the  condemnation 
and  prohibition  of  interest  on  money  was  a  theory  only.  A  very 
ordinary  knowledge  of  classical  civilization  is  sufficient  to  explain  the 
reason  of  this.  More  nearly  than  ony  other  institution,  the  financial 
machinery  of  antiquity  corresponds  to  that  of  modern  life.  Trusts 
and  millionaires  were  phenomena  of  their  economic  life  as  of  ours. 
Banks  were  numerous  and  ubiquitous.  They  were  of  all  sizes  and 
degrees;  from  the  great  metropolitan  corporation  with  correspondents 
all  over  the  civilized  world,  to  the  hated  money  lender  in  a  shabby  office 
on  a  side  street.  The  great  bankers  were  men  of  the  first  importance 
in  society.  From  their  number  were  regularly  recruited  the  officials 
of  the  imperial  treasury.  They  were  almost  without  exception  men 
of  the  strictest  financial  integrity.  The  Roman  banking  laws  pro- 
tected the  depositor  more  securely  than  the  laws  of  any  modern 
nation,  and  these  Roman  laws  were  rigidly  enforced.  Every  banking 
institution  had  to  obtain  government  authorization  in  order  to  do 
business  and  this  authorization  was  withdrawn  on  the  discovery  of 
the  smallest  discrepancy  in  the  accounts.  The  regular  rate  of  inter- 
est on  ordinary  deposits  was  four  percent;  under  certain  peculiar 
conditions  the  rate  went  as  low  as  two  and  a  half  and  as  high  as 
six  percent.  The  rate  published  by  a  bank  had  to  be  paid  even  though 
payment  swept  away  the  banker's  entire  private  property.  The 
banker  lost  everything  before  the  depositor  lost  anything.  The 
banks  were  used  by  the  government  in  carrying  out  such  fiscal 
measures  as  could  not  be  conveniently  handled  by  the  treasury 
department  directly.    They  played  a  still  more  important  part  in  the 


36  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

ordinary  commercial  life  of  the  times.  A  relatively  small  volume  of 
business  was,  or  could  be,  carried  on  by  transfers  of  specie.  The 
great  bulk  of  commercial  transactions  were  of  necessity  carried  on  by 
checks,  drafts,  discounts,  bills  of  exchange  and  similar  instruments 
of  credit.  It  was  a  matter  of  simple  impossibility  for  any  man  in 
ordinary  commercial  or  industrial  life  to  carry  on  his  business  for 
even  a  single  day  without  participating  directly  or  indirectly  in 
transactions  involving  loans  and  interest. 

Our  excuse  for  reciting  these  commonplace  details  of  Roman 
commercial  life  is  that  their  very  commonplaceness  explains  the 
discrepancy  between  early  Christian  theory  and  practice  in  the 
matter  of  interest.  It  would  be  an  easy  task  to  convict  the  early 
Christians  of  hypocritical  pretense  in  this  regard.  Nothing  more 
would  be  necessary  than  to  print  their  theory  in  one  column  and  their 
practice  in  a  parallel  one.  Yet  the  early  Christians  were  not 
hypocrites.  As  regards  sincerity  of  profession  they  compare  very 
favorably  with  any  religionists  of  any  age.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the 
historians  have  long  ago  shown  that  it  is  altogether  impossible  and 
unjust  to  argue  from  a  sect's  opinions  to  their  feelings  and  actions. 
To  quote  Macauley^^  "Only  imagine  a  man  acting  for  one  single  day 
on  the  supposition  that  all  his  neighbors  believe  all  that  they  profess 
or  act  up  to  all  thay  they  believe.  Imagine  a  man  acting  on  the 
supposition  that  he  may  safely  offer  the  deadliest  injuries  and 
insults  to  everybody  who  says  that  revenge  is  sinful;  or  that 
he  may  safely  intrust  all  his  property  without  security  to  any  person 
who  says  it  is  wrong  to  steal.  Such  a  character  would  be  too  absurd 
for  the  wildest  farce."  "The  law  which  is  inscribed  on  the  walls  of 
the  synagogues  prohibits  covetousness.  But  if  we  were  to  say  that  a 
Jew  mortgagee  would  not  foreclose  because  God  had  commanded 
him  not  to  covet  his  neighbor's  house,  everybody  would  think  us 
out  of  our  wits."^^  Yet  that  Jew  is  no  hypocrite  in  his  religion.  He 
is  sincerely  and  honestly  devoted  to  his  faith  and  will  sacrifice  time 
and  money;  will  undergo  social  obloquy  and  contempt  in  support  of 
it.  So  it  was  with  the  early  Christians.  By  the  process  of 
abstracting  their  theory  and  practice  of  interest  from  the  social 
matrix    which    alone    makes    the    theory    or    practice  intelligible, 

*i  Sir  James  Macintosh. 

"  Civil  Disabilities  of  the  Jews. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  37 

it  is  easy  to  show  a  logical  inconsistency.  It  would  be  equally  foolish 
and  false  to  deduce  from  this  inconsistency  any  conclusions  one  way 
or  the  other  as  to  early  Christian  morality.  It  is  if  course  no  aim  of  this 
thesis  to  attack  or  defend  any  religious  or  moral  opinions.  It  is  a 
matter  entirely  apart  from  our  present  concern  to  evaluate  interest 
or  non-interest  in  ethical  terms.  Our  purpose  is  not  to  explain  away 
the  inconsistency  of  the  early  Christians.  Admitting  the  inconsis- 
tency in  the  fullest  degree,  our  aim  is  to  explain  it  as  natural,  and, 
under  the  social  conditions  then  prevailing,  practically  inevitable. 
The  early  Christians  left  funds  to  care  in  perpetuity  for  the  family  burial 
lot.^'  Under  any  religiouscreed;Pagan,  Jewish,  or  Christian,  decent 
provision  for  the  care  of  graves  of  relatives  was  not  only  admissible,  it 
was  a  positive  demand  of  social  reputability;  to  say  nothing  of  the 
demand  of  natural  affection. 

Similarly  annual  agapes  were  established  by  bequests  as  a  charity 
to  the  poor  brethren.^^  These  agapes  were  no  innovation.  As  an 
institution  they  were  perfectly  familar  and  in  universal  observance 
among  the  pagans.  The  agapes  were  simply  ordinary  Roman  silicer- 
nia  with  the  name  changed.  To  the  Romans,  founding  a  silicernium 
v/as  like  wearing  a  toga  or  going  to  a  bath.  It  possessed  the  sanction 
of  law  and  the  benediction  of  religion;  but  its  real  compulsion  lay 
in  social  custom.  No  person  could  escape  this  pressure  of  the  mores 
and  retain  self  respect,  to  say  nothing  of  the  respect  of  others. 
The  pagan  silicernium  was  morally  respectable;  it  perpetuated 
friendship  and  promoted  good  feeling.  There  was  no  reason  for 
avoiding  it,  if  avoidance  had  been  possible — as  it  was  not.  The  Chris- 
tians not  only  preserved  this  pious  institution;  they  improved  it. 
Their  annual  agapes  fed  the  poor,  which  the  silicernia,  excellent  as 
they  were,  seldom  did. 

The  explanation  we  have  endeavored  to  give  of  the  endowment 
of  family  burial  lots  and  annual  agapes  is  applicable,  mutis  mutandis, 
to  other  cases  of  interest.  It  therefore  is  not  surprising  to  learn  that 
Callixtus  (pope  218-223  a.d.)  was  a  banker  previous  to  his  elevation 
to  the  papacy;  that  large  numbers  of  Christians,  particularly  widows 

^  Lourie,  Monuments  of  the  Early  Church,  Chap.  II. 
"  Lourie,  ihid. 


38  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

and  orphans — entrusted  their  money  to  his  bank,  and  that  he  had 
large  loans  out  at  good  interest  to  Jewish  bankers.^^ 

The  truth  is  that  the  early  Christian  horror  of  interest,  while 
absolutely  honest  and  even  desperately  sincere,  was  a  strictly  leg- 
alistic, ceremonial,  and  ritualistic  horror.  It  was  purely  formal  and 
was  not  at  all  concerned  with  any  economic  principle.  The  thing 
that  was  wicked,  was  not  income  from  capital  invested,  but  income 
in  the  form  of  interest  on  money.  To  own  a  ship  and  sail  it  and  make 
profits  from  ownership  by  freight  charges  was  perfectly  honest,  but 
to  invest  money  in  a  shipping  corporation  and  receive  dividends  was 
wicked.  So  it  was  honest  to  own  a  building  and  get  money  as  rent. 
It  was  immoral  to  invest  money  in  the  consrtuction  company  that 
erected  that  building  and  receive  income  in  the  form  of  interest. 
Rent,  profit,  and  interest  are  merely  three  forms  of  the  same  thing, 
income  from  invested  capital.  Any  endeavor  to  distinguish  between 
them  in  this  respect  is  entirely  devoid  of  moral  or  economic  jus- 
tification. The  ancient  Church  fathers  were  as  well  aware  of  this  as 
we  are.  The  real  point  and  importance  of  their  concept  of  interest  was 
their  defense  of  that  concept.  That  defense  was  a  curious  one  and 
illustrates  the  difference  between  ancient  and  modern  reasoning  on 
economic  and  matters — and  on  other  matters  also.  The  difference  in  a 
word  is  that  of  mistaking  means  for  ends  on  the  theory  of  course  that 
we  moderns  are  right  and  the  prophets,  philosophers,  Christian 
fathers,  et  al.  wrong.  According  to  modern  social  science,  interest 
is  merely  a  means  adopted  for  the  attainment  of  certain  ends — 
economic,  educational,  religious  or  whatever.  The  goodness  or  bad- 
ness of  interest  is  to  be  judged  strictly  and  solely  by  the  convenience 
and  economy  with  which  it  serves  these  ends.  If  any  other  property 
institution  can,  in  a  given  situation,  serve  a  given  end  more  easily 
and  more  cheaply  than  the  institution  of  interest,  then,  in  that 
situation,  the  institution  of  interest — other  things  being  equal — is 
immoral  and  should  be  abolished.  If,  in  the  given  situation,  no 
other  property  institution  can  serve  the  given  end  more  easily  and 
more  cheaply  than  the  institution  of  interest,  then  that  institution 
is  moral  and  should  be  retained.  That  is,  from  the  modern  sociological 
point  of  view,  the  institution  of  interest  is  inconceivable  except  as  a 
means  to  some  end  outside  itself.    As  a  means  it  is  to  be  judged  in  a 

"  Cf.  Hypolytus. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  39 

purely  objective  and  pragmatic  manner  by  the  ordinary  standards 
of  cost  price,  economic,  social,  and  other. 

The  method  of  the  ancients  is  entirely  otherwise.  Assuming 
still  the  correctness  of  the  modern  viewpoint,  which  viewpoint  be  it 
said  is  not  unassailable  and  indeed  is  assailed  by  divers  radicals, 
socialists  and  others,  but  for  the  most  part  persons  lacking  in  pecuniary 
reputabiUty;  the  mistake  then,  that  the  Early  Church  fathers  make 
is  that  of  taking  the  means  for  an  end.  They  have  many  arguments 
against  interest  but  all  these  arguments  can  be  criticised  for  this  one 
error.  The  fathers  elevate  interest  to  the  dignity  of  an  end  in  itself. 
Interest,  qua  interest,  is  condemned.  It  is  taking  advantage  of  a 
brother's  necessity.  It  is  grinding  the  face  of  the  poor.  It  is  pro- 
ducing pride,  luxury,  and  vice.  As  soon  as  moral  value  is  attached 
to  anything,  it  of  course,  is  viewed  as  an  end  in  itself.  If  it  be  true 
that  interest  is  an  end  in  itself,  then  the  fiercest  diatribes  of  the  fathers 
are  none  too  severe.  Assuming  their  premises,  their  conclusions 
follow  inevitably.  The  modern  man — he  is  not  unknown — who  talks 
about  the  "sacred  rights"  of  private  property  is  guilty  of  the  same 
error  as  the  ancient  Christians,  the  error  of  mistaking  means  for  ends. 
The  early  Christians  could  not  see  that  the  property  institution  of 
interest  is  neither  good  nor  bad  except  as  it  is  good  or  bad /or  some- 
thing. The  something  determines  the  judgment.  As  a  matter  of  his- 
torical fact  the  condemnation  of  interest  developed  in  certain  early 
stages  of  human  civilization  and  at  those  stages  interest  was  socially 
detrimental.  At  those  stages,  however,  it  was  exceedingly  rare  and 
correspondingly  infamous.  In  any  country  where  there  is  abund- 
ance of  good,  free  land  the  phenomenon  of  interest  on  money  will 
disappear,  provided  labor  is  free.  So  it  disappeared  in  the  northern 
states  of  this  Union  in  the  later  part  of  the  18th  century. 
These  phenomena  caused  the  southerners  to  adopt  slavery  though 
all  their  English  traditions  had  declared  it  immoral  for  more  than 
three  centuries.  The  relation  of  interest  to  slavery  under  a  condition 
of  free  land  is  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect,  i.e.,  the  requirement 
of  interest  will  produce  slavery  and  the  abolition  of  interest  will 
abolish  slavery .'^^  These  social  phenomena  are  of  importance  in  our 
consideration  of  the  early  Christian  doctrine  of  interest.  That  doc- 
trine was  largely  evaded  and  disobeyed  but  it  still  had  great  effect 

^  A.  Loria.     Cf.  Economic  Basis  of  Society.  (Int.) 


40  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

and  that  effect  was  toward  the  abolition  of  slavery.  We  do  not  mean 
that  this  economic  doctrine  alone  resulted  in  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
or  even  that  it  was  a  chief  cause  in  the  abolition  of  slavery,  it  was 
not  obeyed  well  enough  to  be  such  a  chief  cause;  but  so  far  as  it  was 
obeyed,  it  tended  in  that  direction. 

The  net  result  of  all  Christian  teaching  together  was  to  prolong  the 
existence  of  the  institution  of  slavery  for  two  centuries,  perhaps  for 
three.  The  doctrine  of  the  sinfulness  of  interest  however,  worked 
toward  emancipation  and  forced  slavery  in  its  later  end  to  become 
almost  wholly  agricultural,  i.e.,  to  yield  income  as  rent.  Slaves 
cannot  be  employed  in  commerce  or  industry  in  sufficient  numbers 
to  be  profitable  where  the  institution  of  interest  is  banned  as  it  was  in 
the  'dark  ages.'  The  Christian  concept  of  interest  undermined 
ancient  civilization  by  abrogating,  slowly  but  surely,  the  insti- 
tution of  property  by  which  such  gangs  of  'manufacturing  slaves' 
as  made  the  fortune  of  Crassus,  could  alone  be  made  profitable. 
It  is  an  historical  curiosity  that  it  accomplished  this  result  without 
any  attack  on  the  institution  of  slavery  itself. 

As  soon  as  Christain  doctrines  became  widespread  enough  to 
produce  important  social  results  we  find  Christian  slave  owners  man- 
umitting their  slaves  in  considerable  numbers.  It  is  no  derogation 
to  the  influence  of  the  doctrine  of  human  brotherhood  or  to  the 
humanity  of  the  Christian  slave  owners  to  mention  the  fact  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  sinfulness  of  interest,  by  tending  to  make  slavery 
unprofitable,  aided  in  the  process  of  bringing  to  light  the  real  content 
of  the  doctrine  of  human  brotherhood,  and  of  making  the  humane 
practice  of  manumission  easier  by  the  removal  of  certain  economic 
impediments. 

In  order  to  understand  properly  the  working  of  the  prohibition 
of  interest  and  its  relation  to  manumission,  it  is  necessary  to  carry  the 
analysis  one  step  farther  to  its  ultimate  physical  basis,  which  was 
the  conditioning  factor  of  actual  practice  and  eventually  of  theory 
also.  The  exhaustion  of  the  soil  of  western  Europe  which  was  the 
result  of  ancient  methods  of  agriculture,  together  with  the  rising 
standard  of  living  and  the  competition  of  other  more  fertile  agricultural 
regions  like  Egypt  and  North  Africa  resulted  in  the  substitution 
of  the  latifundi  for  small  landholdings.^''  As  the  pressure  continued 
*^  Cf.  A.  Loria,  Economic  Foundations  of  Society.  (Int.) 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  41 

the  latifundi  in  turn  became  economically  unprofitable  under  forced 
labor  (slavery)  and  large  tracts  of  land  were  abandoned.  In  order  to 
put  this  land  under  agriculture  again  the  charge  upon  it  had  to  be 
reduced  by  the  substitution  of  (relatively)  free  associated  labor, 
villange  or  serfdom.  But  this  change  cut  off  the  economic  margin 
upon  which  the  structure  of  ancient  civilization  was  built  and  is  the 
ultimate  economic  reason  assignable  for  the  fall  of  Rome.  Of  course 
the  collapse  of  the  empire  could,  theoretically,  have  been  avoided 
had  the  Romans  of  the  first  three  centuries  a.d.  been  content  to  live 
the  toilsome  and  frugal  life  of  the  Romans  of  the  early  republic. 
But  this  was  an  utter  impossibility  in  practice.  This  slowly  working 
and  hardly  understood  decline  in  the  relative  and  actual  ability  of 
ancient  agriculture  to  sustain  the  weight  imposed  upon  it,  enables  us 
to  see  why  the  sinfulness  of  interest  could  be  steadily  indoctrined  even 
though  steadily  evaded,  by  Christians  from  the  beginning,  while 
manumission  was  not  taught  at  all  in  the  beginning  and  only  worked 
up  to  the  dignity  of  a  pious  action  relatively  late.^^  It  also  explains 
why  manumission  of  household  and  personal  slaves  preceded  that 
of  agricultural  slaves.  Of  course  there  is  nothing  peculiarly  Chris- 
tian about  this  later  phenomenon  and  the  operation  of  other  causes 
is  discernable,  but  it  is  important  for  our  purpose  to  observe  that 
Christian  practice,  and  Christian  theory  in  property  matters  in  the 
long  run,  followed  the  broad  lines  of  the  underlying  economic  evolu- 
tion.^^ The  application  of  this  to  the  origin  of  Christian  monasticism 
and  to  the  revival  of  communistic  theories  by  the  later  Church  fathers 
lies  at  the  very  outside  limit  of  our  study  but  will  be  briefly  touched 
on  after  we  have  considered  the  final  overthrow  of  the  communistic 
property  concept  as  they  appear  in  the  earlier  fathers  up  to  and  includ- 
ing Tertullian. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  153-217  a.d.  has  the  distinction  of  being 
the  first  Christian  theological  writer  who  clearly  expounds  the  concept 
of  private  property  which  has  held  sway  without  substantial  change 
in  the  Church  until  the  present  time.  This  statement  does  not  apply 
to  the  doctrine  of  receiving  interest  on  money.  In  respect  to 
this  doctrine  Clement  is  in  perfect  accord  with  all  other  early  Chris- 

"  Circa  200  (?). 

»9  Cf.  K.  Marx,  Das  Kapital,  Vol.  1. 


42  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

tians  both  before  and  after  himself.  Indeed  he  specifically  states 
that  the  Mosaic  prohibition  against  taking  interest  from  one's  brother 
extends  in  the  case  of  a  Christian  to  all  mankind.  But  in  regard  to 
all  other  property  institutions  Clement's  attitude  is  essentially  that 
of  any  modern  Christian  of  generous  disposition. 

In  all  that  Clement  has  to  say  about  property,  and  the  'bulk'  of 
his  'property  passages'  is  as  great  as  that  of  all  previous  Christian 
writers  together,  he  speaks  like  a  man  on  the  defensive.    Indeed  there 
has  come  down  to  us  no  other  Christian  writing  earlier  than  his  time 
which  presents  his  view,  with  the  dubious  exception  of  some  passages 
in  Hermas.     The  fact  seems  to  be  that  while  Clement  is  undoubtedly 
presenting  an  apologetic  for  the  existing  practice  in  the  Church  of 
his  day,  that  practice  was  felt  to  be  more  or  less  open  to  attack  in  the 
light  of  certain  scripture  passages.     Communism  as  an  existential 
reality  was  gone  by  the  time  of  Clement — whatever  may  have  been  the 
extent — probably  a  limited  one — to  which  it  had  existed  in  the  earlier 
ages.     But  while  communism  as  a  fact  was  dead,  communism  as  an 
idea  or  ideal  of  Christian  economy  was  not  dead.    Indeed  Clement's 
views  about  the  morality  of  wealth  were  so  different  from  those  of 
previous  writers  that  a  great  modern  economist^"  in  treating  of  this 
subject  ventures  the  opinion,  though  doubtfully,  that  the  reason  why 
Clement,  alone  among  the  great  early  theologians,  was  never  canon- 
ized by  the  Church  was  that  he  ran  counter  to  popular  belief  on  this 
subject.    This  opinion  is  probably  erroneous.    Clement's  theological 
opinions  have  a  semi-Gnostic  tinge  quite  sufficient  to  explain  the 
absence  of  his  name  from  the  calendar  of  saints. 

Clement  justifies  the  institution  of  private  property.  He  justifies, 
on  the  highest  ethical  and  philosophical  principles,  the  possession  by 
Christians  of  even  the  most  enormous  wealth.  His  apologetic  is  not 
an  original  one.  He  borrows  it  bodily  from  Plato.  Indeed  he  quotes 
Plato  verbatim,  invocation  to  Pan  and  the  other  heathen  gods 
included.^^  The  originality  lies  in  applying  this  Platonic  doctrine  to 
the  exposition  of  Christian  scripture.  Clement's  method  is  strictly 
that  of  Bibical  exegesis.  In  the  well  known  sermon  or  essay  on: 
"Who  is  the  Rich  Man  that  shall  be  saved"  he  takes  up  practically 
all  of  the  scriptural  passages  which  seem  opposed  to  the  institutions 

^°  F.  Nitti  in  Catholic  Socialism. 

^'  Phaedus,  The  Laws,  in  Strom.  II,  6. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  43 

of  private  property  and  explains  them  in  so  modern  a  spirit  that  the 
whole  sermon  might  be  delivered  today  in  any  ordinary  Church 
and  would  be  readily  accepted  as  sound  and  reliable  doctrine.  His 
thesis  is  that  wealth  or  poverty  are  matters  in  themselves  indifferent. 
That  riches  are  not  to  be  bodily  gotten  rid  of,  but  are  to  be  wisely 
conserved  and  treated  as  a  stewardship  intrusted  to  the  owner  by 
God.  That  charity  to  the  poor  should  be  in  proportion  to  one's  wealth 
and  that  a  right  use  of  wealth  will  secure  salvation  to  the  upright 
Christian  even  though  he  possesses  great  riches  all  his  life  and  leaves 
them  to  his  heirs.  The  wealth  that  is  dangerous  to  the  soul  is  not 
pyhsical  possessions,  but  spiritual  qualities  of  greed  and  avarice. 

His  views  can  be  best  expressed  by  himself.  We  give  two  char- 
acteristic passages  from  the  sermon  above  referred  to.^^  "Rich  men 
that  shall  with  difficulty  enter  into  the  kingdom,"  is  to  be  apprehend- 
ed in  a  scholarly  way,  not  awkwardly,  or  rustically,  or  carnally. 
For  if  the  expression  is  used  thus,  salvation  does  not  depend  upon 
external  things,  whether  they  be  many  or  few,  small  or  great,  or 
illustrious  or  obscure  or  esteemed  or  disesteemed;  but  on  the 
virtue  of  the  soul,  on  faith  and  hope  and  love  and  brother- 
liness,  and  knowledge,  and  meekness  and  humility  and  truth 
the  reward  of  which  is  salvation."  "Sell  thy  possessions."  What  is 
this?  He  does  not,  as  some  off  hand  conceive,  bid  him  throw  away  the 
substance  he  possesses  and  abandon  his  property;  but  he  bids  him 
banish  from  his  soul  his  notions  about  wealth,  his  excitement  and 
morbid  feeling  about  it,  the  anxieties,  which  are  the  thorns  of  exis- 
tence which  choke  the  seed  of  life.  And  what  peculiar  thing  is  it  that 
the  new  creature,  the  Son  of  God  intimates  and  teaches?  It  is 
not  the  outward  act  which  others  have  done,  but  something  else 
indicated  by  it,  greater,  more  godlike,  more  perfect,  the  stripping  off 
of  the  passions  from  the  soul  itself  and  from  the  disposition,  and  the 
cutting  up  by  the  roots  and  casting  out  of  what  is  alien  to  the  mind." 
"One,  after  ridding  himself  of  the  burden  of  wealth,  may  none  the 
less  have  still  the  lust  and  desire  for  money  innate  and  living;  and 
may  have  abandoned  the  use  of  it,  but  being  at  once  destitute  of 
and  desiring  what  he  spent  may  doubly  grieve  both  on  account  of  the 
absence  of  attendance  and  the  presence  of  regret."'' 

^  Chap.  XIV. 
»  Chap.  XXXI. 


44  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

We  have  now  come  to  the  beginning  of  what  is  in  many  respects 
the  most  interesting  period  in  the  history  of  property  concepts.  It  is 
a  period  in  which  everything  is  upside  down  and  wrong  end  to.  In 
that  strange  age  we  find  a  famous  archbishop,  one  of  the  world's 
noblest  orators,  a  man  of  the  most  spotless  integrity  and  the  most 
saintly  life,  publicly  preaching  in  the  foremost  pulpit  of  Christendom 
doctrines  of  property,  the  implications  of  which,  the  most  hardened 
criminal  would  scarcely  venture  to  breathe  to  a  gang  of  thieves.** 
We  find  the  most  learned  scholar  of  the  century,  in  the  weightiest 
expositions  of  Christian  Scripture,  penning  the  most  powerful  apologi- 
tic  of  anarchy  that  is  to  be  found  in  the  literature  of  the  world.*^ 
We  find  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  popes,  a  man  whose  genius  as  a 
statesman  will  go  down  to  the  latest  ages  of  history,  setting  forth  in 
a  manual  for  the  instruction  of  Christian  bishops,  property  concepts 
more  radical  than  those  of  the  fiercest  Jacobins  in  the  bloodiest 
period  of  the  Terror.'® 

Stranger  still,  these  incredible  performances  are  the  strongest 
proofs  of  the  wisdom  and  piety  of  the  men  responsible  for  them. 
These  men  are  today  honored  as  the  saviors  of  civilized  religion  and 
their  images  in  bronze  and  marble  and  painted  glass  adorn  the  proud- 
est temples  of  the  most  conservative  denominations  of  Christians. 
The  strange  history  of  these  famous  men:  Athanasius,  the  two 
Gregories,  Basil  and  Chrysostom  in  the  East;  Augustine,  Ambrose, 
Jerome  and  Gregory  in  the  West,  lies  outside  the  limits  of  our  study. 
But  the  explanation  of  their  desperate  and  uncompromising  com- 
munism can  be  given  in  a  word.  It  was  the  communism  of  crisis: 
the  communism  of  shipwrecked  sailors  forced  to  trust  their  lives  to 
a  frail  lifeboat  with  an  insufficient  supply  of  provisions.  These  great 
Christian  scholars,  enriched  by  all  the  accumulated  culture  of  their 
civilization,  saw  that  culture  falling  into  ruin  all  around  them;  they 
felt  the  foundations  of  that  civilization  trembling  beneath  their  feet. 
To  vary  the  figure,  they  beheld  the  rising  tide  of  ignorance  and  bar- 
barism rapidly  engulfing  the  world  and  with  desperate  haste  they  set 
to  work  rebuilding  and  strengthening  the  ark  of  the  Church  that  in 
it,  religion,  and  so  much  of  civilization  as  possible,  might  be  saved 

^  Chrysostom,  Sermons  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus,  etc. 
^  Jerome,  Commentaries. 
^  Gregory,  Pastoralis  Cura. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CON'CEPTS  45 

till  the  flood  subsided.  Their  task,  perhaps  the  most  important 
and  most  urgent,  that  men  have  ever  had  to  perform,  was  of  such  a 
nature  that  they  cared  not  what  they  wrecked  in  order  to  accomplish  it. 
They  ripped  up  the  floor  of  the  bridal  chamber  for  timber  and  took 
the  doors  of  the  bank-safe  for  iron. 

These  rhetorical  figures  are  violent;  but  they  are  less  violent 
than  the  reality  they  are  intended  to  express.  Monasticism  was  the 
last  desperate  hope  of  civilized  Christianity  and  these  men  knew  it. 
To  establish  monasticism  they  degraded  the  sanctity  of  marriage  and 
denounced  the  sacredness  of  property.  They  conferred  the  most  sacred 
honors  upon  the  lowliest  drugery;^^  they  turned  princes  into  plowmen 
and  nobles  into  breakers  of  the  soil.  Some  historians,  judging  them 
by  the  different  standards  of  a  later  age,  have  pronounced  them  fan- 
atics led  astray  by  vulgar  superstition.  But  judged  by  the  needs  of 
their  own  age,  judged  by  the  inestimable  services  rendered  to  the 
world  by  the  monastic  system  they  instituted,  they  are  entitled  to  a 
place  far  up  in  the  list  of  the  wisest  and  the  ablest  of  the  human  kind. 
Sketchy  and  imperfect  as  the  above  study  necessarily  is,  it  never- 
theless gives  the  primary  facts  which  are  essential  to  an  understand- 
ing of  the  important  part  played  by  property  concepts  and  property 
institutions  in  the  transformation  of  early  Christianity  from  a  pre- 
dominantly eschatological  to  a  practically  socialized  movement. 

We  have  seen,^*  that  the  earliest  generations  of  Christians  took 
over  from  contemporary  Judaism  a  strongly  Chiliastic  eschatology. 
The  logical  consequence  of  such  an  eschatology  is  an  indifference  to, 
or  undervaluation  of,  the  existing  social  arrangements  including  the 
property  concepts  and  institutions.  One  form  easily  taken  by  this 
indifference  and  undervaluation  is  that  of  practical  communism. 
We  accordingly  find  in  the  Acts  and  in  such  early  writings  as  the 
Didache  and  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  a  distinctly  communistic  the- 
ory and  the  traces  of  more  or  less  effort  to  put  this  theory  into  some 
degree  of  practical  effect.  Chiliasm  and  communism  in  these  writers 
go  together  naturally. 

Pari  passu  with  this  logical,  communistic  Chiliasm  we  can  trace 
the  development  of  an  illogical,  individualistic  Chiliasm  in  St.  Paul, 
Clement  of  Rome  and  Hermas.    It  is  already  manifest  even  at  this 

3'  Laborare  est  orare. 
"  Chap.  I. 


46  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

early  stage,  that  the  weight  of  influence  and  power  of  control  in  the 
Christian  societies  is  on  the  side  of  the  individualists.  This  is  due 
to  two  causes.  In  the  first  place  the  communists  among  the  Chris- 
tians worked  under  a  great  handicap.  The  underlying  economic 
institutions  of  society  can  indeed  be  changed.  But  they  can  be  changed 
— or  any  considerable  scale — only  very  slowly  and  by  enormous  effort. 
At  any  attempt  to  change  them  a  thousand  interested  and  deter- 
mined antagonists  at  once  arise.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  had  all 
Christians  insisted  upon  communism  as  an  essential  element  of  the 
Christian  faith  and  practice,  Christianity  in  the  Roman  world  could 
never  have  developed  into  anything  more  than  an  unimportant  sect. 
The  very  fact  that  Christianity  spread  as  rapidly  as  it  did  in  the 
first  century  of  its  existence  is  proof  that  the  communists  in  the  Church 
made  very  little  headway.  It  was  hard  enough  to  combat  pagan 
religion  and  philosophy.  Had  the  property  institutions  been  attacked 
also,  the  primary  religious  objects  would  have  been  lost  sight  of  in 
the  conflict. 

In  the  second  place  the  more  practical  minded  Christian  leaders 
would  be  antagonistic  to  a  doctrine  and  practice  which  alienated 
many  persons  who  might  otherwise  be  won  to  the  Church,  and 
practically  minded  persons  outside  the  Church  regarded  the  indi- 
vidualists with  more  favor  and  were  more  easily  influenced  by  them 
to  become  Christians  themselves.  The  early  importance  attained  by 
the  Church  of  Rome  is  to  be  largely  ascribed  to  the  predominance  in 
its  councils  of  such  practical  persons.^^  Communism  had  no  hold 
there  at  all  and  Chiliasm  was  never  allowed  to  interfere  with  the 
practical  workings    of    society. 

By  the  time  of  Justin  the  three  concepts;  Chiliasm,  Communism, 
and  Individualism  had  arrived  at  a  modus  vivendi.  According  to 
this  arrangement  Chiliasm  and  Communism  held  sway  as  theories 
while  individualism  ruled  in  the  world  of  fact.  This  agreement 
proved  very  satisfactory  and  for  more  than  half  a  century  was  the 
the  accepted  thing.    It  is  seen  in  full  force  in  TertuUian. 

There  is  a  general  tendency,  due  to  the  natural  effects  of  use  and 

disuse,  for  theories  which  do  not  correspond  to  realities  to  become 

discredited,  even  as   theories.      Conversely   realities   which   at  first 

lack  theoritical  justification  tend  to  accumulate  such  justification 

^'  E.g.,  Clement  and  Hennas. 


EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PR0PP:RTY  CONCEPTS  47 

with  the  lapse  of  time.  It  is  therefore  not  surprising  to  find  by  the 
beginning  of  the  Third  Century,  a  movement  to  discard  theoretical 
Chiliasm  and  communism  and  to  validate  by  theoretical  apologetic 
the  actually  existing  individualism.  These  two  processes  in  the 
nature  of  the  case  are  closely  connected  with  one  another  and  it  is 
not  by  mere  chance  that  they  find  a  common  exponent  in  Clement  of 
Alexandria.  That  famous  opponent  of  Chiliasm  is  equally  well  known 
as  the  justifier  of  an  extreme  individualism.  He  greatly  facilitated 
the  spread  of  Chriatian  theology  by  liberating  it  from  the  burden 
of  an  eschatological  theory  increasingly  hard  to  reconcile  with  real- 
ity and  also  by  bringing  the  economic  teachings  of  Christianity 
into  conformity  with  current  practice.  As  noted  above,  there 
was  one  economic  doctrine  which  neither  he  nor  any  other  early 
Christian  teacher  ever  attempted  to  reconcile  with  the  facts,  and  it 
is  undoubtedly  true  that  the  doctrine  of  the  sinfulness  of  interest 
was  alike  detrimental  to  the  spread  of  Christianity  and  to  the  general 
well  being  of  society  as  it  then  existed.  The  reasons  why  this  par- 
ticular reality  i.e.,  interest  on  money,  was  so  slow  in  receiving  its 
theoretical  justification  are  numerous.  The  only  ones  that  need 
concern  us  here  are  that  the  opposition  to  be  overcome  in  this  case 
was  much  more  formidable  than  in  the  cases  of  Chiliasm  and  com- 
munism and  the  fact  that  this  inconsistency  on  the  part  of  the  Chris- 
tians did  not  in  reality  offer  any  very  serious  obstacle  to  the  growth 
of  the  Church.  Communism  had  no  great  body  of  Biblical  authority 
at  its  back.  There  are  indeed  some  texts  in  its  favor  but  there  are 
plenty  of  an  opposite  nature.  The  doctrine  had  no  great  popular 
prejudice  in  its  favor.  In  addition  it  was  insuperably  difficult  of 
realization  in  fact.  It  was  otherwise  with  interest.  The  theoretical 
prejudice  against  interest  was  almost  as  great  among  the  Jews  and 
Pagans  as  among  the  Christians  themselves.  The  Scriptures  were 
unequivocal  in  their  denunciation  of  it.  Furthermore  the  correlative 
institutions  of  rent  and  profit  offered  so  many  opportunities  to 
disguise  the  fact  of  interest  that  it  was  exceedingly  easy  to  retain  the 
theoretical  opposition  without  ceasing  the  actual  practice.  Although 
Clement's  condemnation  of  interest  was  probably  merely  an  inherited 
prejudice  it  is  by  no  means  impossible  that  he  considered  that  an 
attempt  to  justify  it  would  endanger  his  defense  of  the  more  funda- 
mental institution  of  private  property.     At  any  rate  his  course  can 


48  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

be  defended  as  a  practical  one  under  the  circumstances.  Whatever 
may  be  said  of  its  consistency,  the  Christian  custom  of  condemning 
the  theory  and  winking  at  the  practice  of  interest  worked  well.  The 
inconsistency  which  seems  so  glaring  to  us,  was  probably  very  largely 
unperceived  by  the  ancient  pagans — they  had  exactly  the  same  incon- 
sistency themselves. 

In  regard  to  Chiliasm  and  property,  practically  the  same  attitude 
prevailed.  It  worked  indeed  even  more  easily.  In  the  West  there 
seems  to  have  been  a  considerable  Chiliastic  tradition.  So  long  as 
this  tradition  did  not  result  in  any  practices  which  interfered  with  the 
actual  progress  of  the  Church,  the  Fathers  were  content  to  let  it 
alone.  It  did  not,  till  at  least  the  Third  Century,  hinder  the  accep- 
tance of  Christian  doctrine  by  the  pagans  and  may  even  have  aided 
the  process  among  some  of  the  lower  classes.  Its  long  survival  can 
be  taken  as  sure  proof  that  it  did  not  effect  either  the  development  of 
the  hierarchy  or  the  institution  of  property. 

As  regards  property  of  man  in  man,  the  superior  power  of  the 
Christian  religion  to  keep  slaves  in  subjection  accounts  in  no  small 
measure  for  its  relatively  rapid  rise  to  power  in  the  ancient  world. 
The  pagan  religion  was  inferior  in  usefulness  to  the  Christian  religion 
because  it  could  not  keep  the  slave  contented  with  his  position.  The 
next  world  in  the  pagan  theology  was  only  a  worse  copy  of  this  world. 
Christianity,  in  glaring  contrast  to  paganism,  proclaimed  that  the 
despised  and  afflicted  were  to  sit  on  golden  thrones  in  the  next  life. 
The  more  they  were  exploited  in  this  life,  the  brighter  their  crown  in 
the  next  one.  The  pagan  slave  was  dangerous.  The  whole  pre- 
Christian  literature  of  Classical  antiquity  shows  the  ever  present 
fear  of  a  servile  outbreak.  There  were  good  grounds  for  that  fear. 
Outbreaks  were  frequent  and  of  a  most  ferocious  character.  On  more 
than  one  occasion  they  threatened  the  very  existence  of  the  ancient 
civilization.  Christianity  was  able  to  make  the  slave  contented  to  be 
a  slave.  It  was  economically  an  enormous  advance  over  paganism. 
A  master  whose  slaves  were  Christians  was  not  afraid  of  being  mur- 
dered by  them.  Not  only  was  the  master's  life  secure,  his  property 
was  secure  also.  The  pagan  slaves  were  notorious  thieves.  The 
Christian  slave  did  not  rob  his  master.  These  facts  gave  Christian- 
ity an  enormous  leverage  in  its  efforts  to  force  its  way  into  social 
recognition.     It  went  far  toward  securing  a  favorable  disposition 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  PROPERTY  CONCEPTS  49 

toward  the  new  religion  on  the  part  of  the  influential,  wealthy,  and 
conservative  elements  in  the  population. 

Into  the  general  economic  changes  which  began  to  operate  toward 
the  end  of  our  period  it  is  not  our  purpose  to  enter,  but  it  is  worth 
notice  that  the  efforts  made  by  the  Church  to  save  itself  in  the 
general  ruin  which  overtook  the  ancient  world,  chiefly  the  institution 
of  monaslicism,  were  such  as  to  secure  more  firmly  than  ever  the  hold 
of  the  Church  upon  society.  The  Church  rapidly  became  an  economic 
factor  of  the  first  importance.  The  only  secure  basis  of  lasting  social 
influence  is  economic.  Christianity  by  teaching  the  virtues  of  honesty 
frugality,  simplicity,  and  charity  laid  the  foundations  of  her  subse- 
quent triumph,  and  when  she  had  great  societies  of  men  and  women 
working  hard  and  living  plainly  and  adding  all  their  accumulations 
to  institutions  belonging  to  the  Church  and  directly  under  the  super- 
vision and  control  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority,  the  Church  paved 
the  way  for  her  subsequent  domination  of  the  civil  government. 
Monastic  communism,  being  economically  superior  to  Chiliastic  Com- 
munism, inevitably  superseded   it. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE 

The  transformation  of  early  Christianity  from  an  eschatological 
to  a  sociaHzed  movement  was  the  result  of  the  interaction  of  three 
social  groups — three  'publics' — the  Jewish,  the  Pagan,  and  the  Chris- 
tian. It  was  a  single  movement,  working  itself  out  through  these 
three  'crowds'.  Christianity,  like  all  other  great  religions,  was  in 
its  first  beginnings  essentially  a  mob  phenomenon — that  is  to  say  it 
was  a  very  slow  movement  which  had  a  long  history  back  of  it. 

Perhaps  no  current  opinion  is  more  unfounded  than  the  notion  that 
mob  movements  are  sudden  and  unpredictable.  They  are  almost 
incredibly  slow  of  development.  The  range  of  action  found  in  the 
mob  is  more  narrowly  and  rigidly  circumscribed  than  in  almost  any 
other  social  group.  A  crowd  is  open  to  suggestions  that  are  in  line 
with  its  previous  experience,  and  to  no  others. 

The  initial  success  of  Christ  with  the  Jewish  crowds  was  only  pos- 
sible because  for  generations  the  whole  Jewish  public  had  been  looking 
forward  to  a  Messiah  and  a  Messianic  kingdom.  In  so  far  as  Christ 
appeared  to  fulfill  this  preconceived  expectation  he  gained  popu- 
lar support.  When  he  disappointed  it,  he  lost  his  popularity  and  his 
life. 

The  early  and  enormous  success  of  the  apostles  on  the  day  of 
Penticost  and  immediately  afterwards  was  due  primarily  to  the  fact 
that  the  Chiliastic  expectation  preached  to  the  Jerusalem  crowds  was 
very  closely  in  line  with  their  inherited  beliefs.  As  soon  as  Chris- 
tianity began  to  develope  doctrines  and  practices  even  slightly  at 
variance  with  those  traditional  to  Judaism  it  lost  the  support  of  the 
Jewish  public.  Beginning  as  a  strictly  Jewish  sect,  it  alienated 
practically  the  whole  Jewish  race  within  little  more  than  a  generation. 
This  alienation  was  the  inevitable  effect  of  an  idea  of  universalism 
opposed  to  the  hereditary  Jewish  nationalism.  This  idea  of  univer- 
salism was  not  a  new  thing.  It  was  to  be  found  in  the  ancient  Jewish 
scriptures.  But  it  had  never  become  popularized.  It  formed  no 
part  of  the  content  of  contemporary  public  opinion  among  the  Jews. 
Christianity  met  with  success  in  the  great  cosmopolitan  centers,  like 
Antioch  and  Alexandria,  where  universalism  was  a  tradition  and  had 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  51 

become  a  part  of  the  crowd  sentiment.  It  succeeded  best  of  all  in 
Rome  where  universalism  reached  its  highest  development.  Yet 
even  here  a  limitation  is  to  be  noted.  Christianity  was  universal 
in  its  willingness  to  receive  people  of  all  races  and  nations.  It  was 
not  universal  in  its  willingness  to  acknowledge  the  validity  of  other 
religions.  This  variation  from  the  traditional  Greek  and  Roman 
universalism  had  momentous  results.  It  made  the  propagation  of 
the  Christian  Gospel  much  more  difficult  and  involved  the  church, 
at  least  temporarily,  in  the  current  syncretism  which  was  a  popu- 
lar movement.  So  e.g.,  we  find  Justin  calling  Socrates  a  Christian 
and  asserting  that  the  stories  of  Noah  and  Deucalion  are  merely 
versions  of  the  same  event. 

The  main  characteristics  of  crowd  psychology  are  familiar  enough. 
Crowds  do  not  reason.  They  accept  or  reject  ideas  as  a  whole. 
They  are  governed  by  phrases,  symbols,  and  shibboleths.  They 
tolerate  neither  discussion  nor  contradiction.  The  suggestions 
brought  to  bear  on  them  invade  the  whole  of  their  understanding  and 
tend  to  transform  themselves  into  acts.  Crowds  entertain  only  vio- 
lent and  extreme  sentiments  and  they  unconsciously  accord  a  mys- 
terious power  to  the  formula  or  leader  that  for  the  moment  arouses 
their  enthusiasm. 

Any  movement  in  order  to  become  popular,  in  order  to  'get  over' 
to  the  general  public,  has  to  operate  within  the  limits  set  by  this 
psychology.  The  amount  of  change,  adaptation,  and  development 
necessary  before  a  movement  can  fit  into  these  limitations  and 
express  itself  powerfully  within  them  is  so  considerable  that  no  his- 
torical example  can  probably  be  found  where  the  required  accommo- 
dation has  been  accomplished  in  less  than  three  generations.  It  is 
the  purpose  of  this  chapter  to  trace,  so  far  as  the  surviving  source 
material  permits,  the  steps  of  this  accommodation  in  the  case  of 
early  Christianity. 

For  some  time  before  Christ  the  Jewish  people  had  been  restless. 
Their  desires  and  aspirations  for  national  and  religious  greatness 
had  been  repressed  and  inhibited.  The  unrest  thus  generated  took 
various  forms;  patriotic  uprisings,  religious  revivals,  etc.  Christ 
was  at  first  considered  merely  as  another  Theudas  or  Judas  of  Galilee 
or  John  the  Baptist.  In  the  pagan  world  the  pax  Romana  produced 
a  somewhat  similar  restlessness.    Travel  increased;  wandering,  much 


52  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

of  it  aimless,  characterized  whole  classes  of  people;^  there  was  a 
marked  increase  in  crime,  vice,  insanity,  and  suicide  which  alarmed  all 
the  moralists.  This  condition  of  affairs  was  eminently  suitable  for 
the  first  beginnings  of  a  crowd  movement;  indeed  no  great  crowd 
movement  can  begin  except  under  such  circumstances.  The 
wanderings  of  St.  Paul  and  the  other  Christians  apostles — 
called  missionary  journeys — were  really  only  particular  cases  of  a 
general  condition.  The  same  organic  demand  for  new  stimulation,  the 
same  sense  of  shattered  religious  and  philosophic  ideals  prevailed  in 
the  pagan  as  in  the  Jewish  world.  It  would  be  hard  to  find  a 
greater  contrast  of  character  than  Christ  and  Lucian.  Yet  the  fiery 
earnestness  with  which  Christ  denounces  contemporary  Jewish  relig- 
iosity and  the  cool  cynicism  with  which  Lucian  mocks  at  the  pagan 
piety  of  the  same  age  have  a  like  cause.  Economic  pressure  on  the 
lower  strata  of  society  contributed  to  the  unrest.  The  slave,  the 
small  shopkeeper,  and  the  free  artisan  had  a  hard  time  of  it  in  the 
Roman  world.  Economically  oppressed  classes  are  material  ready 
to  the  hand  of  the  agitator,  religious  or  other.  In  the  crowd  movements 
recorded  in  the  Acts  we  can  trace  the  first  beginnings  of  the  Christian 
populace.^  "In  Iconium  a  great  multitude  both  of  Jews  and  of  Greeks 
believed  but  the  Jews  that  were  disobedient  stirred  up  the  souls  of  the 
Gentiles  and  made  them  evil  affected  against  the  brethren.  But 
the  multitude  of  the  city  was  divided  and  part  held  with  the  Jews 
and  part  with  the  apostles."  At  Lytra  there  was  a  typical  case  of 
mob  action  where  the  apostles  were  first  worshipped  and  then  stoned. 
In  the  cases  of  the  mobs  at  Philippi  and  Ephesus  we  see  the  economic 
motive,  the  threatened  loss  of  livlihood,  entering  along  with  anger 
at  an  attack  on  the  received  religion.  In  the  case  of  the  Jerusalem 
and  Athenian  crowds  we  see  acceptance,  or  at  least  acquiescence, 
on  the  part  of  the  crowd  up  to  the  point  where  Christianity 
breaks  with  their  tradition.  In  general  we  see  anger  on  the  part 
of  the  crowds  only  after  agitation  diliberately  stirred  up  by  interested 
parties;  priests,  sorcerers,  craftsmen  or  the  like.  Generally  speaking 
the  antipathy  is  no  part  of  the  crowd  psychology,  and  on  occa- 
sion the  crowd  may  be  on  the  side  of  the  missionaries  of  the  new 

^  E.g.,  the  pagan  philosophers. 
2  Acts  14:1-6. 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  53 

religion.  In  general  also  the  Christians  were  not  sufficiently  numer- 
ous to  make  a  counter  crowd  demonstration  of  their  own. 

In  Pliny's  letter  to  Trojan,  although  it  is  a  generation  later  than 
the  Acts  and  refers  to  a  region  where  Christianity  had  been  preached 
for  a  considerable  period  of  time,  we  find  a  marked  instability  in  the 
attitude  of  the  public:  "Many  of  every  age,  every  rank  and  even  of 
both  sexes  are  brought  into  danger  and  will  be  in  the  future.  The 
contagion  of  that  superstition  has  penetrated  not  only  the  cities  but 
also  the  villages  and  country  places  and  yet  it  sees  possible  to  stop  it  and 
set  it  right.  At  any  rate  it  is  certain  enough  that  the  temples  deserted 
until  quite  recently  begin  to  be  frequented,  that  the  ceremonies  of 
religion,  long  disused,  are  restored  and  that  fodder  for  the  victims 
comes  to  market,  whereas  buyers  for  it  were  until  now  very  few. 
From  this  it  may  easily  be  supposed  that  a  multitude  of  men  can 
be  reclaimed  if  there  be  a  place  of  repentence."' 

There  seems  no  reasonable  ground  for  doubting  that  Pliny's  judg- 
ment was  correct.  While  the  blood  of  the  martyrs  is  doubtless  the 
seed  of  the  church,  a  continuous,  general,  and  relentless  persecution 
can  extirpate  a  religion  in  a  given  nation;  as  the  history  of  the 
Inquisition  abundantly  proves.  Still  more  easily  can  propaganda 
for  the  older  religion  win  back  its  former  adherents  of  the 
first  and  second  generations.  It  is  not,  in  general,  till  a  gen- 
eration has  grown  up  entirely  inside  a  new  religion  that  such 
a  religion  is  well  established.  The  generation  which  at  ma- 
turity makes  the  rupture  with  the  older  faith  can  be  brought 
back  to  it  by  less  expenditure  of  energy  than  was  expended  by  them  in 
breaking  away  in  the  first  place.  The  success  of  the  Jesuits  e.g.,  is 
quite  inexplicable  on  any  other  hypothesis.  The  generation  who  are 
children  at  the  time  their  parents  make  the  break  A^ath  the  old  reli- 
gion are  notoriously  undependable  in  the  religious  matters.  It  was 
in  all  probability  these  people  that  Pliny  had  to  deal  with.  It  is  at 
least  permissable  to  hazard  the  guess  that  the  Laodiceans  who 
aroused  the  wrath  of  the  author  of  the  Revelation  were  of  this 
generation.  It  is  certain  that  many  of  the  'Lapsi'  who  caused  so 
much  trouble  to  Christian  apologists  and  church  councils  belonged 
in  this  chronological  class. 

'  Pliny,  Ep.  xcvi. 


54  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

In  Justin  Martyr  we  have  a  hint  of  a  further  development  in  the 
crowd  attitude  toward  the  Christians.  Justin  says:  "When  you 
(Jews)  knew  that  He  had  risen  from  the  dead  and  ascended  to  heaven 
as  the  prophets  foretold  He  would,  you  not  only  did  not  repent  of  the 
wickedness  you  had  committed,  but  at  that  time  you  selected  and 
sent  out  from  Jerusalem  chosen  men  through  all  the  land  to  tell  that 
the  godless  heresy  of  the  Christians  had  sprung  up  and  to  publish 
those  things  which  all  they,  who  knew  us  not,  speak  against  us.  So 
that  you  are  the  cause  not  only  of  your  own  unrighteousness  but  that 
of  all  other  men."'' 

Irrespective  of  the  exact  historical  accuracy  of  this  statement, 
it  is  indicative  of  the  process,  technically  known  as  'circular  inter- 
action,' which  is  so  essential  a  step  in  the  development  of  popular 
opinion  and  the  building  up  of  crowd  sentiment.  Before  any  group 
of  people  can  become  either  popular  or  unpopular  there  must  be  a 
focusing  and  fixation  of  public  attention  upon  them.  Even  in  the 
new  Testament  we  find  the  Jews  sending  emissaries  from  city  to  city 
to  call  attention  to  the  Christian  propaganda.  Prejudice  against 
the  Christians  was  thus  aroused  in  persons  who  had  never  either 
seen  or  heard  them.  The  basis  of  'circular  interaction'  is  uncon- 
scious or  subconscious  emotional  reaction.  A's  frown  brings  a  frown 
to  the  face  of  B.  B's  frown  in  turn  intensifies  A's.  This  simple 
process  is  the  source  of  all  expressions  of  crowd  emotion.  By  mul- 
tiplication of  numbers  and  increase  in  the  stimuli  employed  it  is 
capable  of  provoking  a  vicious  circle  of  feeling  which  eventually 
causes  individuals  in  a  crowd  to  do  things  and  feel  things  which  no 
individual  in  the  crowd  would  do  or  feel  when  outside  the  circle.  It 
is  to  the  credit  or  discredit  of  the  Jews  that  they  first  set  this  '  vicious 
circle'  in  operation  against  the  Christians.  Of  course  the  same 
psychological  principle  operated  to  produce  zeal  and  enthusiasm  and 
contempt  of  pain  and  death  in  the  Christian  'crowd'.  By  this  process 
of  'circular  interaction'  the  name,  'Christian,'  had  already  in  the 
time  of  Justin  become  a  mob  shibboleth.  It  seems  to  have  operated 
precisely  as  the  shibboleth  '  traitor'  operates  on  a  patriotic  crowd  in 
war  time,  or  'scab'  on  a  labor  group.  It  became  a  shibboleth  of 
exactly  opposite  significance  in  the  Christian  'crowd'.  The  way  was 
thus  prepared  for  the  next  step  in  the  process  of  developing  the 
ultimate  crisis.     This  step — the  disparate  '  universe  of  discourse' — is 

*  Dialogue  XVIII. 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  55 

exhibited  in  process  of  formation  in  the  account  of  the  martyrdom 
of  Polycarp.  The  account,  as  we  have  it,  undoubtedly  contains 
later  additions,  but  these  additions  even  of  miraculous  elements,  do 
not  necessarily  invalidate  those  portions  of  the  story  with  which  we 
are  alone  concerned.  The  martyrologist  certainly  had  no  intention 
of  writing  his  story  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  the  principles  of 
group  psychology  and  the  undesigned  and  incidental  statements 
of  crowd  reactions  are  precisely  the  ones  of  value  for  our  purpose. 
A  few  brief  excerpts  are  sufficient  to  illustrate  the  stage  reached  in 
the  growth  of  the  disparate  'universe  of  discourse.'  "The  whole 
multitude,  marvelling  at  the  nobility  of  mind  displayed  by  the  devout 
and  godly  race  of  Christians  cried  out:  "Away  with  the  Atheists: 
let  Polycarp  be  sought  out."^  He  went  eagerly  forward  with  all 
haste  and  was  conducted  to  the  Stadium  where  the  tumult  was  so 
great  that  there  was  no  possibility  of  being  heard. "^ 

"Polycarp  has  confessed  that  he  is  Christian.  This  proclama- 
tion having  been  made  by  the  herald,  the  whole  multitude  both  of  the 
heathen  and  Jews  who  dwelt  in  Smyrna  cried  out  with  uncontrollable 
fury  and  in  a  loud  voice:  "This  is  the  teacher  of  Asia,  the  father  of 
the  Christians  and  the  overthrower  of  our  gods,  he  who  has  been 
teaching  many  not  to  sacrifice  or  to  worship  the  gods.  Speaking 
thus  they  cried  out  and  besought  Phillip,  the  Asiarch,  to  let  loose  a 
lion  upon  Polycarp.  But  Philip  answered  that  it  was  not  lawful  for 
him  to  do  so  seeing  the  shows  of  beasts  were  already  finished.  Then 
it  seemed  good  to  them  to  cry  out  with  one  voice  that  Polycarp  should 
be  burned  alive. "^ 

"This  then  was  carried  into  effect  with  greater  speed  than  it  was 
spoken,  the  multitude  immediately  gathering  together  wood  and 
fagots  out  of  the  shops  and  baths,  the  Jews  especially,  according  to 
custom  eagerly  assisting  them  in  it."^ 

"  We  afterwards  took  up  his  bones,  as  being  more  precious  than  the 
most  exquisite  jewels  and  more  purified  than  gold  and  deposited  them 
in  a  fitting  place,  whither,  being  gathered  together  as  opportunity  is 
allowed  us,  with  joy  and  rejoicing  the  Lord  shall  grant  us  to  celebrate 

6  ]\Iart.  Poly.  III. 
« Ibid.,  VIII. 
'  Ibid.,  XII. 
« Ibid.,  XIII. 


56  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

the  anniversary  of  his  martyrdom  both  in  memory  of  those  who  have 
already  finished  their  course  and  for  the  exercising  and  preparation 
of  those  yet  to  walk  in  their  steps."^ 

In  the  disparate  universe  of  discourse  in  its  complete  form  com- 
mon shibboleths  produce  entirely  different  mental  reactions — usually 
antagonistic  ones.  There  is  also  complete  accord  as  to  the  shib- 
boleths. The  cry  here  is  at  one  time  against  the  Atheists,  then  against 
the  Christians.  But  the  Christians  could  and  did  deny  the  charge  of 
Atheism.  They  were  as  antagonistic  to  Atheism  as  the  Pagans.  An 
incomplete  development  of  crowd  feeling  is  evident  on  the  part  of 
the  pagans.  The  Jews  are  still  the  inciters  and  leading  spirits  of  the 
mob.  The  very  statement  that  the  Jews  acted  'according  to  custom' 
shows  that  mobbing  Christians  was  still  looked  upon  as  a  peculiarly 
Jewish  trait.  It  was  not  yet  entirely  spontaneous  on  the  part  of  the 
pagan  public.  Most  noticable  of  all  is  the  indifference  of  the  mob 
toward  the  Christians'  adoration  of  relics  of  the  martyrs.  No  effort  was 
made  to  prevent  the  Christians  from  obtaining  the  bones  of  Polycarp. 
Either  the  cult  of  relics  was  not  known  to  the  pagans  and  Jews — 
though  it  seems  to  be  firmly  established  among  the  Christians — or  else, 
the  effect  of  the  cult  in  perpetuating  Christianity  had  not  yet  had 
time  to  make  itself  manifest  to  the  pagan  public — or  to  the  Jewish. 
In  any  case  we  have  here  the  plain  evidence  of  the  imperfectly  devel- 
oped condition  of  the  crowd  mind,  owing  perhaps  to  a  too  short 
tradition. 

Our  next  evidence  is  the  martyrdoms  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  pre- 
served in  a  letter  quoted  by  Eusebius.  "They  (the  Christians) 
endured  nobly  the  injuries  inflicted  upon  them  by  the  populace, 
clamor  and  blows  and  draggings  and  roberies  and  stonings  and 
imprisonments  and  all  things  which  an  infuriated  mob  dehght  in 
inflicting  on  enemies  and  adversaries.  "^° 

"  When  these  accusations  were  reported  all  the  people  raged  like 
wild  beasts  against  us,  so  that  even  if  any  had  before  been  moderate 
on  account  of  friendship,  they  were  now  exceedingly  furious  and 
gnashed  their  teeth  against  us." 

"When  he  (Bishop  Pothinus)  was  brought  to  the  tribunal  accom- 
panied by  a  multitude  who  shouted  against  him  in  every  manner  as 

» Ibid.,  XVIII. 
"  Hist.  Eel.  VI. 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  57 

if  he  were  Christ  himself,  he  bore  noble  witness.  Then  he  was  dragged 
away  harshly  and  received  blows  of  every  kind.  Those  men  near 
him  struck  him  with  their  hands  and  feet,  regardless  of  his  age,  and 
those  at  a  distance  hurled  at  him  whatever  they  could  seize,  all  of  them 
thinking  that  they  would  be  guilty  of  great  wickedness  and  impiety 
if  any  possible  abuse  were  omitted.  For  thus  they  thought  to  avenge 
their  own  deities. "^^ 

**But  not  even  thus  was  their  madness  and  cruelty  toward  the 
saints  satisfied.  Wild  and  barbarous  tribes  were  not  easily  appeased 
and  their  violence  found  another  peculiar  opportunity  in  the  dead  bod- 
ies. For  they  cast  to  the  dogs  those  who  had  died  of  suffocation  in 
the  prison  and  they  exposed  the  remains  left  by  the  wild  beasts  and  by 
fire  mangled  and  charred.  And  some  gnashed  their  teeth  against 
them,  but  others  mocked  at  them.  The  bodies  of  the  martyrs  having 
thus  in  every  manner  been  exposed  for  six  days  were  afterwards  burned 
and  reduced  to  ashes  and  swept  into  the  Rhone  so  that  no  trace  of 
them  might  appear  on  the  earth.  And  this  they  did  as  if  able  to 
conquer  God  and  prevent  their  new  birth;  'that',  as  they  said,  'they 
may  have  no  hope  of  a  resurrection  through  trust  in  which  they 
bring  to  us  this  foreign  and  new  religion.'  "^^ 

We  have  in  this  account  a  marked  advance,  as  regards  the 
development  of  the  mob  mind,  over  what  is  found  in  the  martyrdom 
of  Polycarp.  Many  of  the  'crowd'  phenomena  are  indeed  the  same 
but  the  diflFerences  are  even  more  striking  than  the  similarities.  We 
find  in  Lyons  no  body  of  Jews  or  other  especially  interested  persons 
leading  the  mob  on  by  manifestations  of  pecuHar  zeal  and  forward- 
ness. When  the  accounts  are  compared  in  their  entirety  it  becomes  at 
once  manifest  that  there  is  a  consistency  of  attitude,  a  whole  hearted- 
ness  in  the  actions  of  the  Lyons  mob  that  is  lacking  in  the  case  of  the 
Syrmnaens.  There  is  a  degree  of  familiarity  with  Christian  doctrine — 
especially  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection — which  denotes  a  much 
more  through  permeation  of  the  public  mind  by  Christianity.  There 
may  be  no  difference  in  the  hatred  of  the  two  mobs  for  the  new  faith, 
but  it  had  more  content  in  the  mind  of  the  Gallic  crowd.  The 
degree  of  thought  and  pains  taken  by  the  Lyonese  persecutors — the 
guards  placed  to  prevent  the  Christians  from  stealing  the  relics  of 

"  Hist.  Ecc.  V,  1. 
»2  Hist.  Ecc.  V,  II. 


58  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

the  martyrs,  the  elaborate  efforts  to  nullify  the  possibility  of  a  resur- 
rection— the  very  extent  and  throughness  and  duration  of  the  perse- 
cution are  different  from  anything  to  be  found  in  the  other  martyr- 
dom. 

The  difficulty  to  be  explained — if  it  is  a  difficulty — from  the  point 
of  view  of  crowd  psychology  is  that  there  is  difference  of  only  eleven 
years — taking  the  ordinary  chronology — between  the  two  persecutions. 
It  is  true  that  the  Lyons  persecution  is  the  later,  but  the  difference 
in  the  mob  behavior  is  such  as  might  well  demand  the  lapse  of  a 
generation  had  the  phenomena  been  exhibited  by  the  public  of  the 
same  city.  There  must  unquestionably  have  been  a  great  difference 
in  the  demotic  composition  of  the  populations  of  Lyons  and  Smyrna; 
the  reference  to  barbarians  in  Lyons  shows  as  much,  but  the  behavior 
of  mobs  as  controlled  by  the  time  needed  for  the  focusing  and  fixation 
of  attention  and  the  development  of  a  disparate  universe  of  discourse 
is  very  little  effected  by  difference  of  demotic  composition.  It  has 
indeed  been  suggested  by  one  critic, ^^  that  the  persecution  at  Lyons 
belongs  in  the  reign  of  Septimus  Severns  instead  of  that  of  Marcus 
Aurelius.  This  would  explain  away  the  difficulty,  but  there  seems 
no  necessary  reason  for  adopting  this  opinion.  It  would  rather  appear 
that  there  existed  peculiar  conditions  in  Lyons  and  vicinity  which 
account  for  the  fact  that  the  persecution,  so  far  as  we  know,  was 
confined  to  that  locality  and  also  for  the  fact  that  the  mob  mind  was 
in  a  maturer  state  of  antagonism  to  Christianity.  Just  what  these 
peculiar  conditions  were,  it  is  impossible  to  say  with  entire  certainty. 
However  there  is  at  least  a  very  suggestive  hint  in  a  paragraph  by  the 
greatest  modern  authority  on  Roman  GauP^  contained  in  his  well 
known  volume  on  Ancient  France. ^^  The  paragraph  is  also  worth 
quoting  as  giving  a  valuable  insight  into  the  psychology  of  the  peoples 
of  the  ancient  Roman  World.  "The  Roman  Empire  was  in  no  wise 
mairttained  by  force  but  by  the  religious  admiration  it  inspired.  It 
would  be  without  a  parallel  in  the  history  of  the  world  that  a  form 
of  government  held  in  popular  detestation  should  have  lasted  for  five 
centuries.  It  would  be  inexplicable  that  the  thirty  legions  of  the 
Empire  should  have  constrained  a  hundred  million  men  to  obedience. 

>3  Prof.  J.  W.  Thompson. 

"  Fustel  de  Coulanges. 

^^  Hist,  des  insts.  politique  de  I'ancienne  France.     Par.  II. 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  59 

The  reason  of  their  obedience  was  that  the  Emperor,  who  personified 
the  greatness  of  Rome  was  worshipped  like  a  divinity  by  unanimous 
consent.  There  were  altars  in  honor  of  the  Emperor  in  the  smallest 
townships  of  his  realm.  From  one  end  of  the  Empire  to  the  other  a 
new  religion  was  seen  to  arise  in  those  days  which  had  for  its  divini- 
ties the  Emperors  themselves.  Some  years  before  the  Christian  era 
the  whole  of  Gaul,  represented  by  sixty  cities,  built  in  common  a 
temple  near  the  city  of  Lyons  in  honor  of  Augustus.  Its  priests,  elected 
by  the  united  Gallic  cities,  were  the  principal  personages  in  their 
country.  It  is  impossible  to  attribute  all  this  to  fear  and  servility. 
Whole  nations  are  not  servile  and  especially  for  three  cen- 
turies. It  was  not  the  courtiers  who  worshipped  the  prince,  it 
was  Rome,  and  it  was  not  Rome  merely  but  it  was  Gaul,  it  was 
Spain.     It  was  Greece  and  Asia." 

While  no  dogmatic  assertion  is  justified,  it  does  not,  perhaps, 
exceed  the  limits  of  reasonable  inference  to  suppose  that  the  exis- 
tence of  this  noted  center  of  Emperor  worship  in  the  immediate 
neighborhood  of  Lyons  may  account,  in  part  at  least,  for  the  especial 
hatred  of  the  populace  of  that  city  for  persons  who  refused  to  sacrifice 
to  the  Emperor  and  also  for  the  maturity  of  their  feeling  against  the 
Christians,  who  were  as  far  as  we  are  aware,  probably  the  only 
persons  who  refused  thus  to  sacrifice.  This  stray  bit  of  evidence  is 
admittedly  not  conclusive.  It  is  offered  merely  for  what  it  may  be 
worth.  There  is  evidence  that  by  the  middle  of  the  second  Century 
popular  opinion  was  sufliciently  inflamed  against  the  Christians  to 
render  the  administration  of  justice  precarious  because  of  mob  vio- 
lence. Edicts  of  Hadrian  and  Antonius  Pious  specifically  declared 
that  the  clamor  of  the  multitude  should  not  be  received  as  legal 
evidence  to  convict  or  to  punish  them,  as  such  tumultuous  accusations 
were  repugnant  both  to  the  firmness  and  the  equity  of  the  law.^^ 

This  attitude  seems  to  have  persisted  with  relatively  little  change 
for  about  a  century.  During  this  period  the  official  'persecutions' 
were  neither  numerous  nor  severe.  From  the  very  few  scattered  and 
incidental  references  which  have  alone  survived  regarding  the  mob 
feeling  of  the  time,  we  can  assert  no  more  than  that  it  was  an  exas- 
perated one,  likely  to  break  out  upon  provocation  but  under  ordinary 

"  Eus.  H.  E.  IV,  26. 


60  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

circumstances  more  or  less  in  obeyance.  On  the  whole  it  was  undoubt- 
edly more  violent  at  the  end  of  the  period  tham  at  the  beginning. 

Fortunately  from  the  middle  of  the  third  Century  onwards  we 
have  a  fairly  continuous  history  of  a  single  'public'  (Alexandria) 
which  is  lacking  before  this  time.  The  Alexandrian  populace  were 
noted  for  their  tumultuous  disposition,  but  we  have  no  reliable 
account  of  their  behavior  towards  the  Christians  until  the  time  of 
Serverus,  202  a.d.  In  the  account  given  by  Eusebius  of  the  marty- 
dom  of  the  beautiful  virgin,  Potamiaena,  it  is  stated  that:  "the 
people  attempted  to  annoy  and  insult  her  with  abusive  words."  As 
however  the  intervention  of  a  single  officer  sufficed  to  protect  her  from 
the  people  on  this  occasion,  the  public  sentiment  cannot  have  been 
inflamed  to  any  alarming  extent.  If  we  may  trust  Palladius,  her 
martyrdom  was  the  result  of  a  plot  of  a  would-be  ravisher  and  in  any 
case  it  was  not  the  product  of  any  spontanious  popular  movement. 

In  the  period  between  202  a.d.  and  249  a.d.  a  well  developed 
tradition  of  hatred  and  violence  grew  up  in  the  popular  mind.  We 
have  no  record  of  the  steps  in  the  process  but  the  extant  accounts  of 
the  Decian  and  Valerian  persecutions  in  Alexandria  leave  no  doubt 
of  the  fact.  These  persecutions  can  only  be  called  '  legal'  by  a  violent 
stretch  of  verbal  usage.  They  were  mob  lynchings,  sometimes  sanc- 
tioned by  the  forms  of  law,  but  quite  as  often  without  even  the  barest 
pretense  of  judicial  execution.  They  were  quite  as  frequent  and  as 
savage  in  the  later  part  of  the  reign  of  Philip,  as  in  the  time  of  Decius. 
They  were  not  called  forth  by  any  imperial  edict — they  preceeded  the 
edict  by  at  least  a  year  and  were  of  a  character  such  as  no  merely 
governmental,  legal  precess  would  ever,  or  could  ever,  take  on. 
Mobbing  Christians  had  become  a  form  of  popular  sport,  a  generally 
shared  sort  of  public  amusement — exciting  and  not  dangerous.  The 
letter  of  Bishop  Dionysius  makes  this  very  clear.  To  quote:  "The 
persecution  among  us  did  not  begin  with  the  royal  decree  but  pro- 
ceeded it  an  entire  year.  The  prophet  and  author  of  evils  to  this 
city  moved  and  aroused  against  us  the  masses  of  the  heathen  rekind- 
ling among  them  the  superstition  of  their  country  and  finding  full 
opportunity  for  any  wickedness.  They  considered  this  the  only 
pious  service  of  their  demons  that  they  should  slay  us."  Then 
follows  a  long  list  of  mob  lynchings  of  which  we  take  a  single 
specimen:  "They  seized  Serapion  in  his  own  house  and  tortured  him 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  61 

and  having  broken  all  his  limbs,  they  threw  him  headlong  from  an 
upper  story."'''  "And  there  was  no  street,  nor  public  read,  nor  lane 
open  to  us  night  or  day  but  always  and  everywhere  all  them  cried 
out  that  if  anyone  would  not  repeat  their  impious  words,  he  should 
be  immediately  dragged  away  and  burned.  And  matters  continued 
thus  for  a  considerable  time.  But  a  sedition  and  civil  war  came  upon 
the  wretched  people  and  turned  their  cruelty  toward  us  against  one 
another.  So  we  breathed  for  a  while  as  they  ceased  from  their  rage 
against  us."'^ 

The  mob  broke  loose  against  the  Christians  again  the  following 
year,  but  there  is  no  object  in  cataloguing  the  grewsome  exhibitions 
of  crowd  brutality.  It  is  evident  that  what  we  have  in  this  account 
is  no  exhibition  of  political  oppression  by  a  tyrannical  government, 
but  a  genuine  outbreak  of  group  animosity  which  had  been  long 
incubating  in  the  popular  mind.  All  the  phenomena  which  are  char- 
acteristic of  fully  matured  public  feeling  are  found  complete;  circular 
interaction,  shibboleths,  sect  isolation  devices  and  the  rest.  When 
public  feeling  has  developed  to  such  a  degree  of  intensity  as  this,  the 
accumlated  sentiment  and  social  unrest  must  of  necessity  discharge 
themselves  in  some  form  of  direct  group  action.  This  direct  action 
however  may  take  the  from  either  of  physical  violence  or,  under  cer- 
tain conditions,  of  some  sort  of  mystical  experience;  conversion,  danc- 
ing, rolling  on  the  ground,  etc.  In  exceptional  cases  the  two  forms 
are  combined.  An  illustration  of  this  latter  phenomenon  is  given  by 
Bishop  Dionysius  in  this  same  letter;  "In  Cephus,  a  large  assembly 
gathered  with  us  and  God  opened  for  us  a  door  for  the  word.  At  first 
we  were  persecuted  and  stoned  but  afterward  not  a  few  of  the  heathen 
forsook  their  idols  and  turned  to  God."*^  It  is  necessary  to  mention 
perhaps  the  largest,  and  certainly  the  most  dignified  and  respectable 
crowd  that  is  to  be  met  with  in  connection  with  this  persecution — 
that  of  Carthage  on  the  occasion  of  the  martyrdom  of  Bishop  Cy- 
prian. We  find  here  neither  rage  on  one  side  nor  unseemly  exaltation 
on  the  other.  Pagans  and  Christians  alike  behaved  with  decent 
seriousness  at  the  death  of  that  famous  man  who  was  equally  respec- 
ted by  all  classes  of  the  population.     But  martyrs  of  the  social 

"  Eus.  His.  Ecc.  VI,  41. 
"Eus.  His.  Ecc.  VI,  41. 
'9  His.  Ecc.  VII,  11. 


62  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

eminence  of  Cyprian  were  very  rare,  and  orderly  behaviour  in  such  a 
vast  multitude  as  witnessed  his  end  was  still  rarer. 

To  return  to  the  populace  of  Alexandria.  The  long  peace  of  the 
Church  which  intervened  between  the  persecution  of  Valerian  and 
that  of  Diocletian  witnessed  in  Alexandria,  as  elsewhere,  a  great 
growth  of  Christianity  in  numbers,  influence,  and  wealth.  It  would 
perhaps  be  going  beyong  the  evidence  to  say  that  in  this  interval, 
the  majority  of  the  population  of  the  city  were  won  over  to  the  new 
faith,  but  it  is  certain  that  the  number  of  Christians  became  so  great 
as  to  intimidate  the  pagan  portion  of  the  people.  The  Alexandrian 
mob  was  still  very  much  in  evidence  but  it  gradually  ceased  to 
harrass  the  Christians  except  under  the  most  exceptional  circum- 
stances. The  dangers  of  such  action  became  so  considerable  and  the 
chances  of  success  so  problematical  that  we  find  a  period  when  a 
practice  of  mutual  forbearance  governed  the  behavior  of  the  hostile 
groups. 

The  study  of  crowd  psychology  presents  no  more  impressive 
contrast  than  that  exhibited  by  the  people  of  Alexandria  during  the 
Diocletian  persecution  compared  with  their  behavior  during  that  of 
Decius.  In  the  last  and  greatest  of  the  persecutions,  in  the  most 
tumultuous  city  of  the  empire,  the  mob  took  no  part.  Like  the 
famous  image  of  Brutus,  it  is  more  conspicuous  by  its  absence  than 
it  would  be  by  its  presence.  The  persecution  was  a  purely  govern- 
mental measure  officially  carried  out  by  judges  and  executioners  in 
accordance  with  orders.  In  one  obscure  and  doubtful  instance  we 
are  told  that  the  bystanders  beat  certain  martyrs  when  legal 
permission  was  given  to  the  people  to  treat  them  so.  In  another  case 
we  are  told  that  the  cruelty  of  the  punishments  filled  the  spectators 
with  fear.  These  are  the  only  references  to  the  public  that  occur  in 
the  long  and  minute  account  of  an  eye  witness  of  famous  events 
extending  over  a  considerable  number  of  years.  Both  before  and 
after  this  period  the  mob  of  the  Egyptian  metropohs  exhibits  the 
utmost  extreme  of  religious  fanaticism.  During  this  period  that  mob 
had  to  be  most  carefully  considered  by  the  government  in  other 
than  religious  matters.  But  as  a  religious  power  it  did  not  exist. 
Had  the  persecution  of  Diocletian  happened  a  generation  earlier 
it  could  have  counted  on  a  very  considerable  degree  of  popular 
support,  had  it  happened  a  generation  later  it  would  have  caused  a 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  63 

revolt  that  could  only  have  been  put  down  by  a  large  army.  Hap- 
pening at  the  precise  time  it  did,  it  provoked  no  popular  reaction  at 
all. 

This  strange  apathy  is  not  peculiar  to  Alexandria.  Practically 
without  exception  the  authentic  acts  of  the  martyrs  of  this  perse- 
cution are  court  records  taken  down  by  the  official  stenographers 
in  the  ordinary  course  of  the  day's  work.  They  are  dry,  mechanical,  and 
repetitious  to  a  degree.  They  exhibit,  in  general,  harrassed  and  exasper- 
ated judges  driven  to  the  infliction  of  extreme  penalties  in  the  face  of  a 
cold  and  skeptical  public.  One  imperial  decree  ordered  that  all  men, 
women,  and  children,  even  infants  at  the  breast,  should  sacrifice  and 
offer  oblations,  that  guards  should  be  placed  in  the  markets  and  at  the 
baths  in  order  to  enforce  sacrifices  there.  The  popular  reaction  in  Caes- 
area  is  thus  recorded:  "The  heathen  blamed  the  severity  and  exceeding 
absurdity  of  what  was  done  for  these  things  appeared  to  them  extreme 
and  burdensome."-"  "  He  (the  Judge)  ordered  the  dead  to  be  exposed  in 
the  open  air  as  food  for  wild  beasts;  and  beasts  and  birds  of  prey 
scattered  the  human  limbs  here  and  there,  so  that  nothing  appeared 
more  horrible  even  to  those  who  formerly  hated  us,  though  they 
bewailed  not  so  much  the  calamity  of  those  against  whom  these 
things  were  done  as  the  outrage  against  themselves  and  the  common 
nature    of    man."^* 

The  one  thing  to  be  said  of  this  type  of  mob  mind  is  manifestly 
that  it  is  transitional.  The  pendulum  has  swung  through  exactly 
half  its  arc  and  for  the  brief  instant  presents  the  fallacious  appear- 
ance of  quiescence.  How  transitory  this  quiet  was  on  the  part  of 
the  Alexandrian  mob  is  evidenced  by  the  history  of  Athanasius. 
That  great  statesman  conciliated  and  consolidated  public  opinion 
in  Egypt.  Backed  by  this  opinion  he  practically  cancelled  the  power 
of  the  civil  authorities  of  the  country  and  negotiated  as  an  equal 
with  the  emperors.  For  the  first  time  in  more  than  three  centuries 
the  will  of  the  common  people  again  became  a  power  able  to  limit 
the  military  despotism  which  dominated  the  civilized  world. 

The  re-birth  of  popular  government  in  the  Fourth  century  through 
the  agency  of  Christian  mobs  is  the  most  important  preliminary 
step  in  the  growth  of  the  political  power  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

20  Eus.  Mart.  Pal.  II. 
« Ibid.,  Chap.  II. 


64  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

A  study  of  the  mobs  of  Alexandria,  Rome,  Constantinople  and  other 
great  cities  shows  beyond  question  that  the  political  power  of  the 
Church  had  its  origin  in  no  alliance  with  imperial  authority,  but  was 
independent  of  and  generally  antagonistic  to  that  authorit3\  The 
history  of  these  Christian  mobs  lies  outside  the  limits  of  our  study 
but  it  is  worth  while  in  the  case  of  the  Alexandrian  populace  to  give 
two  or  three  brief  extracts  illustrating  the  final  steps  of  the  process 
which  changed  a  fanatically  pagan  mob  into  an  equally  fanatical 
Christian  one.  What  we  have  to  consider  is  only  the  last  stage  of 
an  evolution  already  more  than  half  complete  at  the  time  of  the 
Nicene  Council.  Under  extreme  provocation  and  certain  of  imperial 
complacency  at  their  excesses,  the  pagan  mob  during  the  reign 
of  Julian  indulged  in  one  last  outburst  against  the  exceedingly 
unpopular  George  of  Cappadocia  who  had  been  forcibly  intruded  into 
the  seat  of  Athanasius.  To  quote  the  Historian  Socrates:  "The 
Christians  on  discovering  these  abominations  went  forth  eagerly  to 
expose  them  to  the  view  and  execration  of  all  and  therefore  carried 
the  skulls  throughout  the  city  in  a  kind  of  triumphal  procession  for 
the  inspection  of  the  people.  When  the  pagans  of  Alexandria  beheld 
this,  unable  to  bear  the  insulting  character  of  the  act,  they  became  so 
exasperated  that  they  assailed  the  Christians  with  whatever  weapons 
chanced  to  come  to  hand,  in  their  fury  destroying  numbers  of  them 
in  a  variety  of  ways  and,  as  it  generally  happens  in  such  a  case, 
neither  friends  or  relations  were  spared  but  friends,  brothers,  parents, 
and  children  imbued  their  hands  in  each  others  blood.  The  pagans 
having  dragged  George  out  of  the  church,  fastened  him  to  a  camel 
and  when  they  had  torn  him  to  pieces  they  burned  him  together  with 
the  camel. "^^  In  this  account  we  see  the  last  expiring  efforts  of  the 
pagan  mob  movement.  Any  mob  movement  collapses  rapidly  when 
it  turns  in  upon  itself,  and  the  evil  results  of  its  violence  react  immed- 
iately upon  the  members  of  the  mob.  By  this  time  it  is  evident  that 
the  number  of  Christians  in  Alexandria  was  so  large  that  any  public 
persecution  of  them  brought  serious  and  unendurable  consequences 
upon  the  populace  generally.    Then  the  movement  ended. 

But  in  the  two  centuries  or  more  that  the  pagan  movement  lasted, 
a  contrary  Christian  mob  movement  had  been  developing  along  the 
same  general  lines  as  the  other.    This  movement,  being  later  in  its 

22  Hist.  Ecc.  Ill,  1. 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  65 

inception,  came  to  a  head  correspondingly  later  and  reached  its 
crisis  under  the  patriarch  Cyril.  Its  violence  was  first  directed 
against  the  Jews  whom  the  Christians  appear  to  have  hated  even 
more  than  they  hated  the  pagans.  The  Jews  were  the  weaker  and 
less  numerous  faction  opposed  to  the  Christians  and  as  the  Pagans 
seem  to  have  liked  them  too  little  to  support  them  against  the  Chris- 
tians, it  is  not  surprising  that  the  Christian  mob,  which  had  pretty 
well  reduced  the  political  authorities  to  impotence,  should  vent  its 
rage  against  the  Jews  and  their  synagogues.  "Cyril  accompanied 
by  an  immense  crowd  of  people,  going  to  their  synagogues,  took  them 
away  from  them  and  drove  the  Jews  out  of  the  city,  permiting  the 
multitude  to  plunder  their  goods.  Thus  the  Jews  who  had  inhabited 
the  city  from  the  time  of  Alexander  were  expelled  from  it."^^ 

Sometime  after  the  expulsion  of  the  Jews,  the  Christian  mob, 
now  directing  its  spite  against  the  rapidly  disappearing  paganism, 
perpetrated  perhaps  the  most  atrocious  crime  that  stains  the  history 
of  Alexandria — the  murder  of  Hypatia.  This  beautiful,  learned,  and 
virtuous  woman, '  the  fairest  flower  of  paganism'  is  one  of  the  very  few 
members  of  her  sex  who  has  attained  high  eminence  in  the  realm 
philosophical  speculation.  She  enjoyed  the  deserved  esteem  of  all  the 
intellectual  leaders  of  her  age — Christian  as  well  as  pagan — and  to  the 
latest  ages  her  name  will  be  mentioned  with  respect  by  all  those 
speculative  thinkers  whose  respect  can  confer  honor.  Socrates  des- 
cribes her  murder  as  follows:  "It  was  calumniously  reported  among 
the  Christian  populace  that  it  was  she  who  prevented  Orestes  from 
being  reconciled  to  the  bishop.  Some  of  them  therefore  hurrried 
away  by  a  fierce  and  bigoted  zeal,  whose  ringleader  was  a  reader  named 
Peter,  waylaid  her  returning  home  and  dragged  her  from  her  carriage; 
they  took  her  to  the  church  called  Ceasareum  where  they  completely 
stripped  her  and  then  murdered  her  with  oyster  shells.  After  tear- 
ing her  body  in  pieces,  they  took  her  mangled  limbs  to  a  place  called 
Cinaron  and  there  burned  them."^^ 

Christian  crowd  sentiment  when  hardly  yet  at  its  full  power 
was  deprived  of  its  original  object  of  animosity  by  the  collapse  of 
paganism.  Being  under  the  psychological  necessity  of  expressing 
itself,  this  mob  feeling  happened  to  take  as  shibboleths  some  current 

^  Socrates  Hist.  Ecc.  IIII,  13. 
^  Hist.  Ecc.  VII,  15. 


66  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

theological  catchwords.  The  subsequent  history  of  Alexandria  and 
other  great  cities  presents  therefore  the  strange  scene  of  rival  sects 
disturbing  public  order  and  profoundly  agitating  vast  throngs  of 
people  in  a  struggle  over  the  most  obstruse  and  recondite  meta- 
physical concepts.  For  the  sake  of  clear  thinking  it  is  necessary  for 
us  to  remind  ourselves  that  these  concepts  are  merely  weird  garments 
fortuitously  snatched  up  to  cover  the  nakedness  of  a  profound  social 
and    economic    revolution. 

The  above  sketch,  imperfect  as  it  is  and  full  of  lacunae  due  to 
the  inadequacy  of  the  primary  source  material,  is  yet  perhaps  com- 
plete enough  to  enable  us  to  summarize  the  chief  steps  in  the  process 
of  the  socialization  in  its  aspect  of  a  crowd  movement.  We  have  seen 
that  this  crowd  movement,  like  all  others,  had  its  origin  in  social 
unrest  due  to  shattered  private  and  community  ideals.  The  cus- 
tomary forms  of  expression  being  inhibited  or  repressed,  the 
balked  disposition  experienced  an  organic  demand  for  new  stimu- 
lation. This  new  stimulation  was  sought  in  various  ways;  aimless 
or  practically  aimless  travelling  or  local  wandering,  local  disorder 
and  agitation,  increase  in  crime — and  insanity.  Gradually  this  unrest 
focused  itself  and  public  attention  became  fixed  on  Christianity. 
By  the  process  of  circular  interaction,  the  so-called  'vicious  circle', 
public  sentiment  increased  in  intensity,  the  name  '  Christian'  became 
a  shibboleth.  When  applied  to  an  individual  it  let  loose  upon  him 
the  pent  up  emotion  of  the  mob — an  emotion  or  unreflective  rage  and 
anger.  By  the  further  process  of  idealization  or  sublimation,  using 
the  terms  in  their  technical  sense,  the  populace  came  to  believe  that 
Christianity  was  the  great  and  superhuman  (daemoniac)  source  of 
all  evils;  earthquakes,  disease  epidemics,  famine  etc.  Seeking  release 
for  psychic  tensions  which  were  not  understood  and  largely  sub- 
conscious, they  found  it  in  a  reversion  to  the  oldest  of  the  '  releasing 
instincts'  that  of  hunting.  The  primary  thing  about  the  persecutions 
is  that  they  were  man  hunts.  The  cruelty  exhibited,  while  also 
serving  as  a  tension  release  for  mob  feeling,  is  psychologically  a 
secondary  form  of  such  release — though  a  very  old  form.  The  dis- 
charge of  the  accumulated  public  sentiment  and  of  the  severe  social 
tensions  produced  group  action  of  two  kinds:  (a)  Direct  action: 
tearing  the  victim  in  pieces,  gathering  wood  to  burn  him,  striking 
him  with  sticks,  stones,  etc.     (b)  Expressive  action,  taking  the  form 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  67 

ot  shouts,  cries  and  ejaculations  which  became  customary  and  tradi- 
tional,   'Christianos   ad   leones.'     The   very    methods    of   lynching 
became  ceremonial  and  even  ritualistic.     The  beasts  were  first  choice, 
then  burning  and  then  other  forms  in  descending  scale.    The  narrow 
range  of  the  mob  mind  is  illustrated  by  the  closeness  with  which  it 
adhered   to  contemporary  judicial   methods   of  punishment.     The 
most  obvious  method  of  killing,  and  one  which  had  the  advantage 
of  enabling  a  great  number  of  people  to  see  what  was  going  on,  the 
method  of  hanging,  which  is  in  such  common  use  by  mobs  of  our 
day,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  employed  by  the  ancient  crowds — 
at  any  rate  its  use  was  rare  in  the  modern  form,  strangling.    There 
are  some  cases  of  hanging  naked  women  by  one  foot.     Expressive 
action  also  took  the  form  of  wild  and  fantastic  legends  of  cannibal- 
ism,   child    murder    and    such     like.      The    crisis    of    this    pagan 
mob   movement  came    about    the    middle    of    the    third    century. 
The  Decian  persecution  appears  to  have  been  'popular'  in  the  strict 
etymological  sense  of  that  word.     The  persecution  of  Diolection, 
though  the  most  severe,  seems  to  have  had  no  great  force  of  pagan 
public  sentiment  behind  it.    That  sentiment  was  not  hostile;  it  was 
neutral.     The  populace  did  nothing  to  hinder  the  measures  of  the 
government  and  it  did  nothing  to  help  them.    In  another  generation 
the  pagan  movement  had  spent  itself.     This  analysis  of  the  pagan 
mob  sentiment  against  the  Christians  is  applicable  mutatis  nomin- 
ibus,  to  the  Christians  mob  movement  against  the  pagans  and  to  the 
movement  of  the  'orthodox' Christians  against  the  'heretics.'    Per- 
haps we  should  say  here,  in  defense  of  human  nature,  that  these  mob 
movements  were  not  due  to  human  depravity;  they  were,  in  strict 
literalness,    diseases,    epidemics    of    nervous    disorder    induced    by 
pathological    social    conditions.      Before   any   persecuting   attitude 
became  habitual  to  the  pagan  populace  pagan  common  sense  had 
exhausted    argument,    persuasion,    expostulation  and  every    other 
intellectual  device.     Only  after  reason  and  religion  (in  the  pagan 
sense)  had  been  employed  in  vain;  only  after  long  exasperation  at  a 
hopeless  situation,  when  absolutely  nothing  else  could  be  done,  was 
popular  violence  aroused.     Social  conditions  being  what  they  were, 
traditional  mental  attitudes  common  to  pagan  and  Christians  alike 
required  that  something  be  done  and  mob  action  was  the  last  des- 
perate alternative  to  the  admission  of  a  new  intellectual  concept. 


68  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

The  function  of  Chiliasm  in  this  crowd  movement  is  plain  from 
its  history  as  previously  sketched.  It  was  a  Christian  shibboleth 
peculiarly  valuable  for  securing  group  cohesion,  and  for  arousing 
individual  staying  power  in  times  of  persecution.  Of  the  numerous 
characteristics  of  successful  'sect  shibboleths'  three  are  perhaps 
especially  note  worthy:  (a)  Satisfaction  of  the  demand  for  mystical 
experience,  (b)  Operation  as  an  isolating  device  (c)  Revolt  against 
the  prevaihng  moral  order.  In  the  period  of  greatest  need  Chiliasm 
fulfilled  these  requirements  very  well.  Many  a  Christian  of  little 
education  was  lifted  out  of  himself  to  endure  martyrdom  by  somewhat 
crass  imaginations  of  participation  in  the  reign  of  the  saints  in  the 
rebuilt  Jerusalem.  Many  a  little  band  of  sectaries  maintained  their 
group  solidarity  because  of  the  belief  that  they  were  the  elect  people 
'chosen  of  God'  for  future  glory  in  the  millennial  kingdom.  Many 
a  faithful  one  who  would  otherwise  have  given  up  in  despair,  must 
have  gained  strength  and  courage  from  the  thought  of  that  happy 
era,  soon  to  come,  when  the  cruel  persecutors  of  the  church  would 
be  slaves  suffered  to  live  only  that  their  servitude  might  augment 
the  dignity  and  honor  of  the  saints  in  the  beatific  kingdom. 

The  relation  of  the  Chihastic  expectation  to  that  strange  insen- 
sibility to  pain  which  was  so  remarkable  a  characteristic  of  the  early 
martyrs  cannot  be  stated  with  exactness.  It  was  probably  close — 
at  least  in  numerous  cases.  We  have  what  seems  to  be  entirely 
trustworthy  evidence  that  not  only  strong  men  but  even  delicate 
and  sensitive  women  exhibited  the  power  of  inhibiting  the  normal 
reactions  to  the  most  excrutiating  torments.  This  almost  incredible 
power  of  inhibition  can  only  be  explained  as  the  result  of  the  build- 
ing up  of  a  pathologically  intense,  ecstatic,  mental  state.  This 
ecstatic  mental  state  would  appear  to  have  been  acquired  by  a  series 
of  psychic  changes  and  organic,  neuronic  adjustments  requiring, 
ordinarily,  a  fairly  considerable  amount  of  time.  This  peculiar 
psychological  condition  had  not  merely  to  be  built  up.  It  must  have 
attained  .an  extraordinary  degree  of  habituation  in  order  to  render  its 
subjects  impervious  to  such  extreme  sensory  excitations.  The  requi- 
site degree  of  imperviousness  can  hardly  have  been  acquired  without 
such  permeation  of  consciousness  by  imagination  as  constituted  a 
complete  subjective  universe.  Many  of  the  martyrs  would  seem 
to  have  lived,  more  or  less  habitually,  in  a  mental  world  of  their  own 


THE  EARLY  CHURCH  AND  THE  POPULACE  69 

which  shut  them  off  from  susceptibihty  to  external  stimuli.  This 
condition  is  frequently  found  in  artists  and  thinkers,  and  with  the 
accompanying  insensibility  to  pain,  is  a  common  phenomenon  in  the 
'trance'  state  as  well  as  in  some  forms  of  insanity.^ 

It  would  go  beyond  the  evidence  to  claim  that  Chiliastic  concepts 
functioned  exclusively,  or  even  predominantly,  in  the  production 
of  the  'martyr  psychosis,'  but  the  evidence  does  point  to  the  con- 
clusion that  apocalyptic  expectations  held  a  more  prominent  place 
in  the  consciousness  of  the  martyrs  than  in  that  of  the  generality  of 
Christians.  It  is  certain  that  Chiliasm  became  especially  manifest 
in  times  of  persecution  but  Chiliasm  must  have  operated  even  in 
ordinary  times  to  produce  the  phenomena  which  persecution  brought 
into  prominence.  Even  today,  in  the  entire  absence  of  persecution, 
Chiliastic  excitement  among  certain  groups  of  secretaries  produces 
types  of  religious  psychosis  closely  similar  to  those  exhibited  by  the 
martyrs.^ 

On  the  whole  the  conclusion  appears  warranted  that  the  increas- 
ing power  and  progressive  socialization  of  the  church,  which  made 
persecution  at  first  hopeless  and  at  last  impossible,  rendered  Chil- 
iasm, as  a  crowd  shibboleth,  gradually  useless  and  finally  pernicious 
to  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy.  Had  further  persecutions  been  pos- 
sible Chiliasm  would  no  doubt  have  been  retained  longer,  but  its 
usefulness  was  fatally  impaired  v/hen  the  majority  of  people  nom- 
inally embraced  Christianity.  It  was  of  little  or  no  value  in  those 
struggles  with  heretical  Christian  sects  which  engaged  the  activities 
of  orthodox  mobs  from  the  time  of  Constantine  onwards.  Other 
shibboleths  such  as  'The  Church'  and  'Catholicism'  were  more  effec- 
tive in  this  contest.  Similarly  for  the  larger  purpose  of  ecclesiastical 
polity,  agencies  like  monasticism  and  missionary  enterprise  were 
employed,  which  conserved  the  shibboleth  values  of  Chiliasm  and 
were  free  from  its  defects  as  an  instrument  of  hierarchial  ambition. 
The  aims  of  the  rulers  of  the  Church  became  increasingly  social  and 
political  and  with  such  aims  Chiliasm  was  fundamentally  incom- 
patible. 

^  Cf.  E.  UnderhiU  'Mysticism.' 
^  E.g.,  The  Dukhabours. 


CHAPTER  IV 
CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM 

Perhaps  the  most  pronounced  characteristic  of  pre-Christian, 
Judaistic  ChiHasm  is  its  nationahstic  or  ethnic  patriotism.  Of  course 
any  attempt  to  rigidly  differentiate  the  nationahstic  and  rehgious 
concepts  of  the  Hebrews  of  the  two  centuries  preceding  the  advent 
of  Christianity  would  be  foredoomed  to  failure.  Never  perhaps 
were  patriotism  and  rehgion  more  nearly  synonymous  than  at  this 
period  among  this  people.  That  their  Chihasm  has  a  strongly  nation- 
ahstic content  is  therefore  natural  and  inevitable.  The  same  patri- 
otic animus  is  to  be  found  in  a  great  number  of  their  other  religious 
tenets  and  practices.  The  emphasis  is  perpetually  upon  the  enhance- 
ment of  the  value  of  the  Jewish  race  and  nation  and  the  corresponding 
depreciation  of  other  nations  and  faiths. 

But  while  it  is  true,  that,  owing  to  the  inseparable  integration 
of  Church  and  State  in  Judea,  in  the  first  two  centuries  before  Christ, 
we  find  a  very  considerable  proportion  of  the  religious  beliefs  and 
observances  highly  charged  with  nationahstic  patriotism;  this  is  per- 
haps more  noticeable  in  the  case  of  Chiliasm  than  in  the  case  of  any 
other  contemporary  theological  concept.  The  nature  of  the  Mil- 
lennial behef  was  such  as  qualified  it  to  function  with  especial  ease 
and  success  in  that  particular  historical  situation.  For  considerably 
more  than  half  a  century  before  the  birth  of  Christ  the  dominant 
fact  in  Hebrew  history  is  the  increase  of  the  power  and  influence  of 
the  Roman  state  in  the  political  life  of  the  Jewish  people.  This 
increase  was  perfectly  natural.  Indeed  it  was  inevitable.  That  the 
petty  Judean  state  would  eventually  be  absorbed  in  the  world  wide 
republic  was  a  fact  patent  to  any  reasonably  intelligent  student  of 
the  situation.^  Under  the  circumstances  it  could  hardly  fail  to  take 
place  even  without  any  direct  provocation  to  overt  action  on  the  part 
of  either  Jews  or  Romans.  It  is  not  our  purpose  to  follow  the  long, 
hopeless  struggle  of  the  Jews  against  the  inevitable  extinction  of 
their  pohtical  independence.  The  Jew  was  fighting  against  fate. 
From  the  first  interference  of  Rome  in  the  affairs  of  Palestine  to  the 
last  execution  of  Bar  Cochba  rebels,  the  end  was  never  in  real  doubt — 

^  Cf.  R.  Charles,  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life. 


CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM  71 

humanly  speaking.  The  inevitableness  of  the  catastrophe  in  this 
long  drawn  out  tragedy  is,  in  the  writer's  judgme  it,  in  some  measur- 
able degree  connected  both  with  the  nature  and  subsequent  history 
of  Jewish  Chiliasm.  Later  Hebrew  Chiliasm  is  a  very  peculiar  form 
of  belief.  It  is  characterized  by  what  can  only  be  called  a  crass  and 
exaggerated  anthropomorphic  supernaturalism.  It  would  seem  as  if 
pari  passu  with  the  increasing  conviction  of  the  futility  of  opposition 
to  the  power  of  Rome,  there  was  an  increasing  conviction  of  a  catas- 
trophic supernal  manifestation,  which  manifestation  in  its  details 
became  ever  more  and  more  crude  and  vulgar.  The  developing 
knowledge  and  conviction  of  the  invincible  power  of  Rome  is  suf- 
ficient to  explain  the  increasing  dependence  upon  supernatural  aid 
for  deliverance — but  the  peculiar  crassness  of  the  supernaturalism 
is  the  arresting  element  in  the  later  Jewish  Chiliastic  writings. 
When  every  allowance  has  been  made  for  the  natural  exuberance  of 
the  Oriental  imagination  something  still  remains  to  be  accounted 
for.  It  is  at  least  possible  that  the,  to  our  taste,  repulsive  features  of 
supernalistic  vengeance  and  glory  are  the  result  of  a  long  process  of 
selection.  In  no  people  of  whom  we  have  historical  knowledge  is  the 
spirit  of  nationalistic  patriotism  more  deeply  rooted  than  in  the  Jew. 
We  may  take  it  that  practically  all  the  Hebrews  of  the  generations 
under  discussion  believed  in  an  eventually  triumphant  Jewish  state. 
Differences  of  education,  and  religious  faith,  however,  conditioned 
the  opinions  as  to  the  time  when  this  triumphant  state  would  appear 
and  still  more  the  method  by  which  it  would  appear.  The  better 
educated  Jews,  who  were  conversant  with  the  political  conditions  of 
the  contemporary  world  and  whose  belief  in  supernatural  aid  was 
perhaps  weakest,  appear  to  have  adopted  a  laissez-faire  attitude. 
They  seem  to  have  been  advocates  of  a  pro-Roman  policy;  to  make 
the  best  of  the  existing  Roman  supremacy  waiting  for  the  unpre- 
dictable time  when  Rome  should  follow  the  path  of  Egypt,  Assyria, 
and  other  world  powers  who  in  their  several  ages  had  subjugated 
the  children  of  Abraham.  This  party  would  perhaps  have  been 
willing  to  take  advantage  of  any  condition  of  affairs  which  offered  a 
reasonably  safe  opportunity  of  successful  revolt  but  under  existing 
conditions  they  were  opposed  to  armed  resistance  to  the  mistress  of 
the  world. 


72  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

At  the  Other  end  of  the  scale  was  a  party  of  bigotedly  and  fan- 
atically zealous  patriots  obsessed  with  the  idea  that  immediate 
supernatural  assistance  would  be  forthcoming  in  the  event  of  armed 
revolt.  Between  these  two  parties  was  another  party — if  it  may  be 
called  such — partaking  in  various  degrees  of  the  characteristics  of 
these  two  extremists  parties.  The  Apocaliptic  and  Chihastic 
literature  of  the  period  was  extensive.  It  would  be  possible  to  arrange 
even  such  fragments  as  remain,  according  to  the  preponderance  of 
supernal  elements.  It  would  seem  to  be  a  rational  deduction  that 
if  we  possessed  this  literature  in  its  completeness  we  should  be  able 
(bearing  in  mind  that  we  are  dealing  with  a  relatively  considerable 
period  of  time)  to  follow  the  whole  process  of  the  supersession  of 
more  rational  Chiliastic  concepts  in  favor  of  the  more  crudely  super- 
naturalistic  ones.  Rome  was  at  once  strongly  repressive  of  move- 
ments for  political  liberty  and  tolerant  of  religious  liberty.  Those 
writings  in  which  Chiliastic  expectations  took  the  form  of  advocating 
the  active  preparing  for  and  co-operating  with  the  expected  Messiah 
would  suffer  extinction.  On  the  other  hand  those  Chihastic  beliefs 
which  inculcated  absolute  and  entire  dependence  upon  super- 
natural aid  for  the  achievement  of  national  independence  would  be 
politically  harmless  and  exuberance  in  such  imaginings  might  flourish 
unhindered.  The  more  fantastic  and  absurd  the  expectations  the 
less  likely  they  were  to  be  suppressed  by  the  imperial  authorities. 
Whatever  the  measure  of  truth  in  the  above  conjecture  it  is  certain 
that  Jewish  Chiliasm  developed  to  the  last  extreme  of  extravagance. 
With  the  doubtful  exception  of  some  Hindu  legends,  there  is  nothing, 
which  more  exceeds  the  bounds  of  reason  a  ad  common  sense,  in  the 
Hterature  of  the  world.  It  is  perhaps  not  too  much  to  say  that 
Jewish  Chiliasm  died  of  excess  development — a  method  of  extinction 
of  which  nature  makes  liberal  use. 

The  later  history  of  Jewish  Chiliasm  does  not  concern  us.  Under 
the  constantly  repeated  blows  of  disappointment  it  changed  its  form 
and  content  into  the  more  rational  concept  of  salvation  and  glorifica- 
tion of  the  individual  human  soul  after  death.  What  does  concern 
us  is  that  this  Jewish  Chihasm  in  all  but  its  most  extreme  form  was 
taken  over  by  Christianity.  The  intellectual  background  of  Hebrew 
patriotism  of  course  persisted  in  the  Christians  of  the  first  generation 
who  were  largely  Jews  or  Proselytes.    The  imminent  divine  kingdom 


CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM  73 

of  Christ  does  indeed  take  the  place  of  the  lower  concept  of  a  rigidly 
nationalistic  kingdom.  The  kingdom  of  Christ  even  to  the  first 
generation  of  Christians  must  have  had  a  larger  content  than  the 
previous  Jewish  belief  which  it  fulfilled  and  supplemented.  Yet  the 
essential  thing  to  remember  is  that  so  far  at  least  as  the  Jewish 
Christians  were  concerned  Chiliastic  expectations,  though  somewhat 
further  extended,  were  still  a  form  of  expression  for  the  forces  of 
Hebrew  nationalistic  patriotism.  The  kingdom  of  the  Jews  had 
been  transformed,  or  perhaps  better,  transmogrified,  into  the  King- 
dom of  Christ  and  his  saints-  but  its  essential  content  was  unchanged 
and  so  long  at  least  as  a  considerable  proportion  of  Christians  were 
converted  Jews  this  condition  of  affairs  persisted.  The  constant 
criticism  of  Chiliasm  by  Gentile  Christians  is  that  it  is  Judaizing. 
It  is  perhaps  not  exceeding  the  limits  of  permissable  hypothesis  to 
suppose  that  one  of  the  reasons  why  Chiliasm  failed  to  make  a  per- 
manent place  for  itself  in  the  belief  of  the  universal  church  is  to  be 
found  in  this  very  fact  that  it  was  in  essence  a  form  of  political, 
Jewish,  nationalistic  patriotism,  to  which  the  other  portions  of  the 
Christian  world,  perhaps  unconsciously,  but  not  the  less  effectively, 
objected. 

The  success  of  Roman  imperialism  in  denationalizing  conquered 
peoples  was  truly  remarkable.  In  this  most  diflScult  task  of  practical 
statesmanship  its  accomplishments  far  surpass  those  of  any  other 
empire,  ancient  or  modern.  But  this  success,  great  and  unparalleled 
as  it  was,  nevertheless  was  not  absolute.  Except  in  particular  cases 
it  was  never  really  complete.  The  measure  of  its  accomplishment 
was  very  different  in  different  parts  of  the  empire.  In  Italy,  Gaul, 
Spain,  and  perhaps  Britain  its  success  may  fairly  be  considered 
complete,  but  these  were  countries  where  the  proportion  of  Roman 
settlers  and  colonists  was  very  large.  They  were  countries,  further- 
more, which  were  early  conquered — countries,  which,  at  the  time 
of  the  Roman  conquest,  had  not  advanced  a  great  distance  toward 
the  attainment  of  national  solidarity  in  politics,  religion,  art,  litera- 
ture, war  or  social  intercourse.  This  lack  of  development  of  local, 
national  institutions  and  psychology  left  the  ground  relatively  free 
for  the  development  of  distinctively  Roman  civilization  and  habits 
of  thought.    The  comparative  freedom  of  these  Western  provinces  of 

'  Cf.  S.  J.  Case,  The  Messianic  Hope. 


74  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

the  empire  from  religious  heresies  at  the  time  that  the  Eastern  pro- 
vinces were  so  prolific  of  them,  is  commonly  ascribed  to  inferior 
aptitude  of  these  Western  peoples  for  metaphysical  speculation. 
We  do  not  attempt  to  deny  such  inferiority,  though  the  subsequent 
development  of  metaphysical  speculation  in  Western  Europe  during 
the  time  that  the  reviving  sense  of  nationality  first  began  to  be  felt 
in  the  Middle  Ages  and  Reformation  Era,  suggests  another  cause  as 
operative. 

If  we  consider  three  regions  where  Chiliasm,  and  also  unques- 
tionable heresies,  were  particularly  rife;  i.e.,  Phrygia,  Egypt,  and 
Roman  Africa  we  see  at  once  that  these  regions  were  seats  of  old, 
deeply  rooted,  and  thoroughly  developed  civilizations.  To  go  into 
the  subject  merely  a  little  way  we  find  that  a  nationalistic  tradition 
existed  in  Phrygia  at  the  time  of  the  composition  of  the  Iliad. ^  This 
nationalistic  tradition  was  considerably  more  than  a  thousand  years 
old  at  the  time  of  the  introduction  of  Christianity.  Roman  political 
power  had  by  this  time  been  thoroughly  established  in  the  country 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  political  rebellion  was  contem- 
plated at  the  time  of  the  rise  of  Chiliasm  and  the  heresies.  But  while 
armed  revolt  may  not  have  been  considered  as  practicable,  or  even 
as  desirable,  the  fundamental,  nationalistic  characteristics  of  the 
underlying  strata  of  the  population  do  not  seem  to  have  been  very 
greatly  altered.  Long  before  the  advent  either  of  the  Roman  political 
power  or  the  Christian  religion  a  homogenous,  national  psychology 
had  become  characteristic  of  the  Phrygian  population.  The  Phrygian 
seems  to  have  put  on  Christianity  very  much  as  he  put  on  the  toga. 
He  wore  the  toga  regularly  and  easily  enough  it  may  be,  but  in  ges- 
tures and  action,  in  speech  and  manner,  he  was  still  a  Phrygian. 
This  typical  Phrygian  seems  to  have  been  commonly  regarded  in  the 
contemporary  world  as  a  bucolic  sort  of  individual,  much  perhaps  as 
a  Kansan  is  regarded  in  the  United  States,  and  with  perhaps  as 
much  or  as  little  reason.  The  fact  is  that  while  ancient  Phrygia 
without  question  possessed  a  large  rural  population,  it  also  possessed 
numerous  cities  where  the  graces  and  amenities  of  life  were  as  fully 
developed  as  in  any  of  the  neighboring  provinces  which  did  not  suffer 
from  the  attribution  of  rusticity.    The  human  instinct  to  botanize  a 

3  Cf.  II.,  Ill,  187. 


CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM  75 

neighboring  people  while  doubtless  adding  to  the  gaiety  of  nations 
has  to  be  taken  magna  cum  grano  salis  by  the  historian. 

Whatever  may  be  said  of  their  other  cultural  institutions  it  is  a 
fact  that  the  Phrygians  at  the  time  of  the  introduction  of  Christianity 
had  already  developed  certain  distinctively  national,  religious  char- 
acteristics which  marked  them  oflf  from  their  neighbors. 

The  Phrygian  Mysteries  while  doubtless  in  certain  broad  char- 
acteristics similar  to  the  Eleusinian  Mysteries  had  peculiarities  of 
their  own  and  were  cherished  by  the  people  as  something  particularly 
expressive  of  their  especial  form  of  the  philosophy  of  life.  In  spite  of 
any  decay  and  degradation  which  may  have  overtaken  these 
mysteries  in  the  course  of  a  long  history,  it  is  certain  that  their 
primary  object  was  the  elevation  and  enhancement  of  life. 

The  national  religious  consciousness  of  Phrygia  was  peculiar  in 
the  prominent  place  given  to  women.  To  this  day  it  is  impossible 
to  say  with  certainty  whether  the  superior  place  in  their  religious 
system  is  held  by  the  male  or  female  concepts  of  deity.  Perhaps  on 
the  whole  the  female  concept  preponderates.''  What  is  true  of 
theology  is  also  true  of  cultus.  Priestesses  and  prophetesses  held  a 
position  of  marked  prominence  and  importance.  Possibly  the  most 
pronouncedly  distinctive  mark  of  Phrygian  religion  was  the  emphasis 
upon  inspiration,  immediate  divine  revelation,  exstatic  conditions 
of  religious  excitation,  the  well  known  "Phrygian  Frenzy."  If  now, 
with  even  this  meagre,  historical,  nationalistic  background  in  view, 
we  examine  the  expression  of  Chiliasm  in  Phrygia  we  see  at  once 
how  it  took  the  form  and  color  of  the  national  psychology.  The  most 
pronounced  Chiliastic  expectations  are  found  in  Montanism,  which 
was  so  strongly  marked  by  characteristics  of  its  place  of  origin  that 
it  was  known  throughout  the  rest  of  the  Christian  world  as  the 
'  Phrygian  Heresy.'  So  strong  was  the  influence  of  national  sentiment 
that  a  very  marked  change  was  introduced  in  one,  most  important 
particular.  Christian  Chiliasm,  originating  as  a  Jewish  form  of 
nationalistic  patriotism,  emphasized  the  fact  that  in  the  Millennium 
Christ  was  to  reign  in  Jerusalem,  which  was  to  supplant  Rome  as 
the  center  and  ruler  of  the  world.  In  this  respect  Phrygian  Chiliasm 
makes  a  complete  break  with  the  Hebrew  tradition.  Christ  was  to 
appear  and  reign,  not  in  Jerusalem,  but  in  Pepuza.    An  insignificant 

*  Cf.  W.  M.  Ramsay.,  Art.  Phrygians,  Enc.  of  Religion  and  Ethics. 


76  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

town  of  Phrygia  was  to  become  the  capitol  of  the  world  wide  kingdom 
of  Christ  on  earth,  displacing  both  Rome  and  Jerusalem.  Nation- 
alistic patriotism — not  to  say  megalomania — could  scarcely  go 
farther. 

So  too  Phrygian  Chiliasm  is  remarkable  for  the  prominence  and 
importance  of  the  position  of  women  in  the  movement.  The  women, 
Prisca  and  the  others,  seem  to  have  been  fully  as  prominent  in  the 
movement  as  Montanus  himself  and  they  exercised  a  degree  of 
influence  to  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  parallel  in  contem- 
porary Christian  movements  in  other  countries. 

Similarly,  visions,  revelations,  inspirations,  extraordinary  con- 
ditions of  reHgious  excitation  are  a  marked  feature  of  Phrygian 
Chiliasm.  They  are  of  course  the  old  '  Phrygian  Frenzy'  in  Christian 
guise. 

Not  to  pursue  this  phase  of  the  subject  in  more  detail,  it  is  evident 
that  Phrygian  Chiliasm  bore  in  a  marked  degree  the  impress  of  the 
national,  religious  psychology.  Those  bishops  of  Pontus  and  Syria 
who  persuaded  their  people  to  settle  all  their  worldly  affairs  and 
go  out  into  neighboring  deserts  to  await  the  coming  of  Christ  in 
glory,  exhibit  in  a  more  naive  form  the  power  of  local  group  habits 
of  thought  to  transform  concepts  intruded  from  outside  the  group. 

In  the  case  of  Egypt  it  is  gratuitous  labor  to  dwell  upon  the  fact 
that  the  native  population  at  the  advent  of  Christianity  had  devel- 
oped a  nationalistic  like-mindedness.  This  nation  even  in  the  year 
1  A.D.  had  an  historical  antiquity  greater  than  any  other  nation 
can  show  today — with  the  doubtful  exception  of  China.  In  no  other 
nation  in  the  world  has  there  been  such  an  opportunity  for  climatic 
and  geographic  influences  to  work  their  full  effect  in  producing 
psychological  homogeneity  among  a  population  on  the  whole  remark- 
ably little  disturbed  in  demotic  composition.  It  is  to  be  remarked 
also  that  the  climatic  and  geographic  environments  are  themselves 
remarkably  homogeneous  throughout  the  whole  extent  of  the  nation. 
The  deterministic  school  of  historians  have  a  model  made  to  hand 
in  the  history  of  Egypt — a  model  of  which  it  must  be  confessed  they 
have  made  very  skillful  use.^  This  is  not  the  place,  even  if  the  writer 
had  the  requisite  knowledge,  to  enter  into  any  extended  discussion 
of  the  national  psychology  of  the  Egyptian  populace.    It  is  sufficient 

*  Cf .  Buckle,  Intro,  to  the  Hist,  of  Civilization  in  England. 


CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM  77 

to  mention  one  predominating  feature  of  that  psychology,  a  feature 
so  persistent  and  ubiquitous  that  the  study  of  it  alone,  enables  the 
investigator  to  obtain  a  true  insight  into  much  that  is  otherwise 
obscure  in  almost  every  variety  of  social  expression  among  the 
Egyptians;  law,  politics,  government,  art,  science,  literature,  and 
religion.  This  predominating  feature  can  perhaps  be  best  defined  as 
a  certain  low  estimate  of  the  value  of  individuality  in  the  common 
man,  a  cheap  appraisal  of  the  worthwhileness  of  the  life  of  the 
ordinary  person.  It  seems  to  have  a  relatively  slight  ethnic  ele- 
ment— if  indeed  it  can  be  truthfully  said  to  have  any.  It  makes 
its  appearance  substantially  unchanged  in  all  subtropical  countries 
situated  in  the  same  general  physical  environment  as  Egypt;  e.g., 
Southern  China,  India,  Mesopotamia,  Mexico  and  Yucatan;  in  all 
countries  that  is,  where  the  natural  conditions  for  sustaining  and 
propagating  human  life  are  relatively  easy  and  where  the  economic 
surplus  of  productive  physical,  as  opposed  to  intellectual,  labor  is 
unusually  great.  Nevertheless  the  fact  that  Egypt  is  in  this  category 
is  due  to  a  highly  special  geographic  phenomenon,  the  overflow  of 
the  river  Nile.  So  that  by  comparison  with  the  nations  immediately 
contiguous  to  Egypt,  this  psychology  may  be  truly  said  to  be  dis- 
tinctively national  in  spite  of  its  similarity  to  that  of  other  peoples 
more  remote  geographically. 

It  is  perhaps  unnecessary  to  do  more  than  mention  a  very  few  of 
the  ways  in  which  this  characteristic  of  Egyptian  psychology  has 
affected  the  national  life.  It  has  rendered  the  population  largely 
passive  under  the  successive  yolks  of  Persians,  Greeks,  Romans, 
Arabs,  Turks,  and  Englishmen,  to  mention  only  some  of  the  more 
prominent  exploiters.  It  has  made  possible  the  erection  of  those  vast 
pyramids  of  stone,  devoid  alike  of  necessity  or  use,  which  remain  to 
this  day  one  of  the  wonders  of  the  world.  It  has  enabled  religions  at 
once  superstitious  and  debasing  to  flourish  in  the  midst  of  a  high  de- 
gree of  material  civdlization. 

For  our  purpose  it  is  sufficient  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that 
this  mental  bias  makes  any  change,  even  in  the  acquired  concepts  of 
the  people,  especially  difficult  of  accomplishment.  This  is  very  well 
illustrated,  in  the  study  of  Egyptian  Chiliasm.  In  no  other  country 
were  the  efforts  necessary  to  overthrow  Chiliastic  concepts  so  long 
drawn  out,  so  persistent,  so  futile  of  immediate  success.    Indeed  they 


78  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

did  not  finally  succeed  till  long  after  the  period  embraced  in  this 
study.    When  the  good  bishop  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  247-264  a.  d., 
held  his  conference  with  the  village  Chiliasts  of  the  Arsinoite  noma, 
some  of  them  were  indeed  won  over,  but  we  are  told  that  'others 
expressed  their  gratification  at  the  conference'.     It  is  evident  that 
they  were  'of  the  same  opinion  still',  Dionysius  himself^  was  not  the 
first  of  the  Alexandrians  to  oppose  Chiliasm.    There  was  much  effort, 
both  by  him  and  others,  to  eradicate  the  concept  before  and  after 
this  Arsinoite  conference.    Yet  we  know  that  later  on,  villagers  from 
this  region  became  monks  in  the  Thebiad,  and  manuscripts  still  sur- 
viving from  the  Thebiad,  show  that  apocalyptic  and  Chiliastic  liter- 
ature was  popular  with  the  monks,  generations,  and  even  centuries, 
after  the  death  of  Dionysius.    It  is  a  notable  example  of  the  national 
character  of  the  Egyptians.    They  let  their  aggressive  and  dominat- 
ing superiors  have  their  own  way  in  appearance — but  in  appearance 
only.     The  underlying  currents  of  thought  remained  essentially  un- 
changed among  the  commonality.  The  resistance  was  passive — perhaps 
almost  imperceptible — but  it  was  real  and  persistent.    In  the  case  of 
Roman  Africa — the  country  north  of  the  Sahara  Desert  and  west  of 
Egypt — the  problem  is  more  complicated.    In  Roman  times  down  to 
the  Vandal  invasion,  the  population  of  this  region,  leaving  out  of  ac- 
count certain  small  and  relatively  negligible  numbers  of   Greeks, 
Egyptians  and  others  found  mainly  in  the  larger  cities,  the  population 
was  composed  of  three  distinct  strata.    At  the  top  were  the  dominant 
Romans,  insignificant  in  point  of  numbers  but  having  the  monopoly 
of  government,  law,  and  administration.     They  were  practically  un- 
disguised exploiters;  government  officials  whose  main  business  was  to 
forward  corn  and  oil  to  Rome  and  incidentally  enrich  themselves; 
agents  of  the  great  Roman  landlords  intent  on  transmitting  rents  to 
their  patrician  employers — already  in    the  time  of  Nero  the    Sena- 
torial Province  of  Africa  was  owned  by  as  few  as  nine  landlords — 
absentee  landlords  living  in  Rome, — and  finally,  the  numerous  body 
of  inferior  agents;  lawyers,  money  lenders,  and  estate  managers  whose 
services  were  indispensable  to  the  carrying  on  of  the  vast  system  of 
economic  exploitation. 

Beneath  this  thin,  dominant,   Roman  upper  crust  was  a  vast 
population  of  artisans,  tradesmen,  agricultural  and  other  laborers, 

«  Cf.  Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.,  VII,  24  seq. 


CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM  79 

serfs,  and  slaves.  This  great  body  of  the  commonality  was  to  a 
remarkable  degree  still  very  j^urely  Punic  even  in  late  Roman  times. 
They  differed  ethnically,  linguistically,  religiously,  and  otherwise 
from  their  rulers.''  We  find  St.  Augustine,  centuries  after  the  Roman 
conquest,  writing  a  letter  in  Latin  to  one  of  his  clergy,  but  requesting 
him  to  translate  it  into  Punic  and  communicate  it  to  his  congregation. 
It  is  useful  to  remind  ourselves  of  the  fact  that  the  population  of 
north  Africa  in  the  first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  was  much 
greater  than  it  is  now.  Centuries  of  Mohammedan  mis-government 
account  for  this  in  part  but  the  chief  cause  is  to  be  found  in  those 
profound  climatic  changes,  the  origins  of  which  are  still  obscure,  that 
have  reduced  to  desolate  and  barren  wilderness  whole  regions  which 
in  Roman  times  abounded  in  populous  cities  and  in  rich  and  fertile 
agricultural  lands.  This  large  population  had  the  cohesion  which 
results  from  centuries  of  similar  and  essentially  unchanged  social 
habits  and  it  had  also  that  sense  of  strength  which  comes  from  large 
numbers,  and  that  pride  which  results  from  the  inheritance  of  a 
proud  history.  They  never  wholly  lost  that  spirit  which  had  made 
their  ancestors  great.  They  never  forgot  that  in  former  ages  they  had 
competed  as  the  equals  of  Rome  for  the  lordship  of  the  world. 

To  the  South  toward  the  Desert  and  the  Atlas  Mountains  dwelt 
a  third  section  of  the  population.  They  were  nomads  or  semi- 
nomads,  troglodytes,  and  mountain  peoples.  Their  manner  of  life 
remains  essentially  the  same  today  as  it  was  in  Roman  times  and  as 
it  was  for  centuries  before  Rome  set  foot  in  Africa.  The  Romans 
never  succeeded  in  subduing  this  population  except  temporarily  and 
for  short  periods.  The  imperial  government  did  what  it  could,  and 
by  means  of  military  posts  and  patrols  kept  a  kind  of  order,  but  its 
success  was  only  moderate. 

Christianity  in  Roman  Africa  reflects  this  threefold  division  of 
the  population,  as  is  to  be  expected.  Cyprian,  in  spite  of  the  sincere 
religious  faith  and  high  moral  character  which  elevates  him  so  high 
above  the  social  class  to  which  he  belonged,  is  still  the  most  typical 
hierarch  of  his  age.  In  his  writings  we  find  the  whole  philosophy 
of  the  governing  class  translated  into  ecclesiastical  language.  It  is 
highly  significant  that  in  all  the  numerous  and  voluminous  writings 
of  this  Father  there  is  not  a  line  about  Chiliasm.     Ideas  of  such  a 

'  Cf.  Alex.  Graham,  Roman  Africa. 


80  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

nature  found  little  reception  in  the  minds  of  men  daily  engaged  in 
the  practical  duties  of  making  as  much  as  possible  out  of  the  manage- 
ment and  control  of  a  vast  population  economically  and  politically 
subordinated  to  them. 

It  would  seem  that  Chiliasm  was  in  fact  very  largely  confined  to 
the  Punic  commonality.  Tertullian  is  the  great  representative  of 
this  class.  The  very  considerable  success  of  his  views  can  only  be 
ascribed  to  their  being  acceptable  to  the  general  body  of  his  local, 
Christian  contemporaries.  It  is  at  least  imaginable  this  success  was 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  personal  characteristics  of  this  great  African; 
his  impetuosity,  his  boldness,  his  sternness,  his  pride,  his  vengeful 
spirit  were  truly  representative  of  the  psychology  of  the  people  whose 
spokesman  he  was.  It  is  notable  that  he  was  perhaps  the  greatest  of 
the  Chiliasts. 

The  reader  who  has  followed  the  argument  thus  far  may  be  saying 
to  himself  at  this  point:  "  If  it  be  granted  that  the  national  characters 
of  the  peoples  of  Phry^ia,  Egypt,  North  Africa  or  elsewhere,  con- 
ditioned their  acceptance  of  Chiliastic  beliefs  and  the  ways  in  which 
these  beliefs  found  expression,  what  has  that  to  do  with  the  subject 
of  this  chapter  which  is  Chiliasm  and  Patriotism?"  It  is  to  that 
point  we  shall  now  direct  our  attention,  but  what  has  been  said  above 
is  necessary  to  the  proper  consideration  of  the  matter.  We  have 
endeavored  to  show  that  in  Phrygia,  Egypt,  and  North  Africa  there 
existed  nationalistic  psychologies  in  the  commonality.  It  will  be 
recalled  that  we  have  shown  in  an  earlier  chapter  the  curious  fact 
that  Chiliasm,  though  originally  a  perfectly  orthodox  doctrine — 
indeed  one  of  the  most  important  portions  of  the  true  faith,  never- 
theless in  the  course  of  its  historical  development,  became  mixed  up 
with  heresies  to  a  degree  beyond  any  rational  explanation  by  the 
law  of  chance  or  the  rule  of  average.  It  would  seem  almost  as  though 
there  was  some  natural  affinity  between  this  particular  orthodox 
doctrine  and  almost  any  heresy;  which  finally  resulted  in  its  being 
itself  condemned  as  heretical. 

The  reason  for  this  was  that  Chiliasm,  like  the  heresies,  was  a 
psychic  equivalent  for  patriotism.  No  stranger  or  more  unwar- 
ranted delusion  is  to  be  found  in  the  whole  range  of  church  history 
than  the  one  still  uri fortunately  common,  to  the  effect  that  for  several 
centuries  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era  the  populace  of  whole 


CHILIASM  AND  PATRIOTISM  81 

religions  were  obsessed  with  incredible  zeal  over  the  most  abstruse, 
metaphysical  speculations.  It  is  indeed  true  that  the  ostensible 
objects  of  the  conflict  were  philosophical  ideas  but  the  realities 
behind  these  symbols  were  tangibles  of  a  very  genuinely  mundane 
order;  economic  exploitation,  social  inequality,  and  suppressed 
national  patriotism.  This  is  evident  enough  in  cases  like  the  Dona- 
tists  in  Africa,  but  a  little  consideration  of  the  evidence  in  the  light 
of  the  developments  of  the  Freudian  psychology,  will  make  it  clear 
in  almost  all  of  the  heresies,  and  in  the  case  of  orthodoxy  also,  when 
the  imperial  government  chanced  to  be  itself  heretical.  So  far  as 
the  writer  is  aware  no  study  of  any  great  length  has  been  made  of 
this  matter,  which  would  richly  repay  investigation;  but  our  concern 
is  more  directly  with  Chiliasm  and  the  larger  problem  must  be  left 
to  others  for  solution. 

Freud  has  shown  beyond  reasonable  hope  of  successful  refutation, 
that  experiences  which  the  mind  has  completely  forgotten  leave 
emotional  'tones'  which  remain  active  and  are  the  determining  cause 
of  physical  and  mental  conditions.  A  thought  'complex'  is  a  system 
of  ideas  or  associations  with  an  especially  strong  emotional  tone. 
A  complex  may  be  of  extremeinteresttoanindividualby  reason  of  his 
social  education  and  hereditary  mentality  and  yet  be  out  of  harmony 
with  e.g. ,  security  of  life  and  property :  so  a  conflict  arises  in  the  mind. 
This  conflicting  complex  is  gotten  rid  of  in  various  ways;  rationaliza- 
tion, repression,  disassociation,or  what  not,  but  the  energy  or  interest 
which  initiated  the  complex  remains  none  the  less  and  something 
must  become  of  its  force.  This  undirected  emotional  force  is  the 
cause  of  dreams,  neuroses,  and  psychic  trauma.^  Such  in  the  most 
sketchy  outline  is  Freud's  idea.  The  application  to  the  case  under 
consideration  is  obvious.  Patriotism  was  a  repressed  'complex'  to 
the  peoples  of  Phrygia,  Egypt,  and  Roman  Africa.  The  mental 
conflict  brought  on  by  the  repression  was  rationalized  easily  enough, 
no  doubt,  so  far  as  the  conscious  mind  of  the  populace  was  concerned, 
but  the  disassociated  emotional  energy  was  let  loose  on  other  con- 
cepts with  which  it  had  no  proper  connection  originally,  i.e.,  problems 
of  philosophical  speculation.  Chiliasm  was  a  speculative  concept  of 
a  sort  to  make  an  especial  appeal  under  the  circumstances.  So  far  as 
his  conscious  mind  was  concerned  the  Phrygian  might  be  perfectly 

*  Cf.  A.  H.  Ring,  Psychoanalysis. 


82  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

reconciled  to  Roman  political  supremacy.  He  might  rationally 
prove  to  his  own  satisfaction  that  such  political  supremacy  was  really 
to  his  own  advantage  in  the  long  run.  Any  idea  of  resistance  was 
sure  to  be  repressed  by  the  certainty  of  losing  his  property  and  life. 
Yet  the  emotional  energy  of  his  patriotism  remained  and  it  naturally 
associated  itself  with  any  idea  that  lay  at  hand.  Chiliasm  happened 
to  be  at  hand.  The  glorified,  divine  kingdom  of  the  Saints  of  God  on 
earth  was  the  psychic  equivalent  of  that  Phrygian  kingdom  whose 
national  existence  had  been  forever  extinguished  by  Rome.  Similarly 
that  national  patriotism  which  under  other  historical  circumstances 
might  have  found  satisfaction  in  the  glory  of  an  independent  Egypt 
now  found  expression  in  the  borrowed  phraseology  of  Jewish  and 
Christian  apocalyptical  literature.  The  same  is  true  of  course  of  the 
Punic  and  Nomadic  strata  of  the  population  of  Roman  Africa.  To 
the  new  Jerusalem  which  was  to  come  down  out  of  heaven  from  God, 
these  peoples  transferred  their  now  useless  and  hopeless  longing  for 
the  Carthage  of  the  days  of  Hannibal  and  for  Jugurthan  Numidia. 
If,  as  we  have  endeavored  to  show,  Chiliasm  represented  the 
strivings  of  repressed,  national  patriotisms,  we  can  readily  understand 
the  increasing  opposition  it  encountered  on  the  part  of  the  great 
dignitaries  of  the  Church.  As  the  Christian  hierarchy  became 
increasingly  perfected,  the  desire  of  the  prelates  for  unity  and  cohesion 
in  the  Church  became  correspondingly  greater.  But  national  patriot- 
ism is  essentially  a  disrupting  and  disintegrating  force  to  any  imperial- 
istic organization,  civil  or  ecclesiastical.  Chiliasm  being  associated 
with  this  separatist  tendency,  naturally  came  to  be  regarded  as 
heretical,  and  as  such,  was  suppressed. 


CHAPTER  V 
CHILIASM  AND  SOCIAL  THEORY 

We  have  seen  that  in  the  first  generations  of  the  Church's 
existence  the  rapidly  approaching  end  of  the  world  was  a  doctrine 
firmly  held  by  almost  all  Christians.  We  have  seen  how  by  the  fifth 
century  this  doctrine,  though  doubtless  still  believed  by  small  num- 
bers of  individuals  and  isolated  groups,  was  practically  dead.  We 
have  endeavored  to  show  some  of  the  more  important  political, 
economic,  social,  and  religious  effects  of  this  belief  and  of  its  declen- 
sion. The  changes  which  took  place  almost  imperceptibly  during  the 
course  of  more  than  three  centuries  in  the  status  of  this  doctrine 
make  any  evaluation  of  its  influence  very  difficult.  It  is,  however, 
probably  well  within  the  truth  to  say  that  the  transformation  of  early 
Christianity  from  an  eschatological  to  a  socialized  movement  is,  in 
some  respects,  one  of  the  most  important  changes  in  its  history.  The 
change  was  actual  and  objective  rather  than  formal  and  theoretical. 
It  profoundly  influenced  the  practical  lives  of  Christians,  but  it 
produced  no  alternation  whatever  in  the  creeds  of  the  Church.  As 
has  been  shown  in  the  preceding  chapters  it  is  for  these  reasons  at 
once  more  difficult  to  investigate  and  more  troublesome  to  evaluate. 

The  difficulties  of  the  subject  itself,  considerable  as  they  are; 
lack  of  adequate  source  material,  doubt  as  to  the  authenticity  and 
reliability  of  such  sources  as  we  have;  and  ever  present  theological 
prepossession,  these  difficulties  after  all  do  not  offer  such  hindrances 
to  fruitful  investigation  as  another  factor,  the  present  condition  of 
sociological  methodology.  The  writer  is  not  learned  in  the  various 
forms  of  scientific  method,  but  he  doubts  whether  any  other  science 
is,  in  this  respect,  in  such  a  chaotic  condition  as  sociology.  It 
is  reasonable  to  expect  of  any  science  that  it  will  have  some  general 
rules  for  the  investigation  of  the  data  in  its  field,  and  some  general 
principles  for  the  interpretation  of  the  results  of  investigation. 
Sociology  is  no  exception  in  this  respect.  In  fact  the  number  of 
sociological  'principles,'  so  called,  is  almost  incredibly  great.  A  mere 
descriptive  enumeration  of  them,  and  a  by  no  means  exhaustive  one, 
fills  a  considerable  volume.^     But  so  far  as  the  writer  is  aware,  no 

'  L.  M.  Bristol,  Social  Adaptation,  Harvard  Economic  Studies,  Vol.  XIV.  Cam- 
bridge 1915. 


84  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

effort  has  been  made  to  apply  these  principles  or  any  considerable 
number  of  them,  systematically,  to  the  elucidation  of  any  movement, 
contemporary  or  historical.  In  general  each  principle  has  had  its 
own  advocates  who  have  applied  it  to  varying  ranges  of  historical 
phenomena — generally  to  the  total  or  at  least  considerable,  exclusion 
of  other  principles. 

These  sociological  principles  are  not  only  very  numerous — they 
are  of  very  various  value.  No  successful  classification  of  them  has 
thus  far  been  made.  It  is  very  possible  that  in  the  present  state  of  the 
science  no  successful  classification  can  be  made.  Yet  no  study  of  an 
historical  movement  can,  without  loss,  dispense  with  the  aid  given 
by  these  general  sociological  principles.  The  writer  will,  therefore, 
in  the  briefest  possible  manner,  try  to  show  some  of  the  aspects  of 
early  Chiliasm  as  they  appear  in  the  light  of  a  few  of  these  principles. 

The  list  of  principles  employed  is  not  an  exhaustive  one.  It  can 
not  even  claim  to  be  comprehensive  of  all  the  principles  which  might 
fairly  be  said  to  be  important.  On  the  other  hand  it  perhaps  includes 
some  principles  which  some  sociologists  would  probably  consider  of 
minor  importance.  There  is  as  yet,  unfortunately,  no  considerable 
agreement  on  this  matter  among  sociologists  of  different  nationali- 
ties and  schools.  The  reason  of  course,  is  that  the  social  reality  v/hich 
these  principles  endeavor  to  explain  contains  facts  which  are  intel- 
lectually incompatible  but  which  nevertheless,  do  actually  exist 
together. 

One  of  the  most  important  and  one  of  the  most  convenient 
methods  of  investigating  social  phenomena  is  the  statistical  method. 
In  all  cases  of  social  pathology  this  method  is  so  valuable  as  to  be 
almost  indispensable.  In  other  cases  its  use  needs  to  be  more  care- 
fully guarded.  In  the  problem  we  have  considered  the  use  of  the 
statistical  method  has  been  evidently  impossible  except  in  the  most 
incidental  manner.  We  do  not  know  how  many  Christians  expected 
any  particular  kind  of  Second  Advent  to  take  place  within  any  given 
length  of  time.  If  we  had  information  for  each  decade  to  the  time 
of  Augustine,  of  the  number  of  'convinced'  Chihasts  and  the  number 
of  'adherents'  who  were  inclined  toward  that  belief,  together  with 
information  as  to  the  number  of  years  within  which  each  of  these 
groups  expected  the  Second  Advent,  it  is  needless  to  say  that  such 
facts  would  enable  us  to  judge  the  movement  with  a  considerable 


CHILIASM  AND  SOCIAL  THEORY  85 

approach  to  historical  certainty.  Even  such  incidental  and  frag- 
mentary information  as  has  come  down  to  us  in  regard  to  the  number 
of  Chiliastic  believers  is  most  valuable  and  such  use  has  been  made  of 
it  as  may  be.  If  the  use  of  the  statistical  method  has  not  been  more 
extensive,  it  is  because  of  lack  of  data. 

Perhaps  the  most  widely  known  of  all  sociological  principles  is 
that  called  Economic  Determinism,  or  the  Economic  Interpretation 
of  History,  or  Historical  Materialism.  More  and  more,  of  recent 
years,  this  principle  has  been  employed  by  historians.  The  classic 
statement  of  the  doctrine  is  found  in  the  Communist  Manifesto. 
The  Introduction  to  the  second  edition  states:  "In  every  historical 
epoch  the  prevailing  mode  of  economic  production  and  exchange  and 
the  social  organization  necessarily  following  from  it,  form  the  basis 
upon  which  is  built  up,  and  from  which  alone  can  be  explained,  the 
political  and  intellectual  history  of  that  epoch;  that  consequently 
the  whole  history  of  mankind  (since  the  dissolution  of  primitive 
tribal  society  holding  land  in  common  ownership)  has  been  a  history 
of  class,  struggles,  contests  between  exploiting  and  exploited,  ruling 
and  oppressed  classes."^ 

In  the  apphcation  of  this  principle  to  our  subject  we  are  lead  to 
expect  a  genuine,  though  not  necessarily  direct,  connection  between 
the  declension  of  eschatological  expectations,  the  increase  of  socializa- 
tion in  early  Christianity  and  such  broad  economic  movements  as 
resulted  from  the  soil  exhaustion  of  Western  Europe  and  the  decreased 
productivity  of  compulsory  associated  labor.  In  the  substitution  of 
serfdom  for  slavery  and  in  the  growth  of  monasticism  we  certainly 
have  two  movements  which  profoundly  affected  the  Church,  and 
had  a  considerable  part  in  altering  the  attitude  of  mind  which  made 
Chiliastic  expectations  tenable.  It  is  probably  true  that  what  we 
have  here  is  considerably  more  than  a  mere  coincidence  of  time, 
i.e.,  that  Chiliasm  declined  as  serfdom  developed  and  was  dead  by 
the  time  the  patronage  system  was  established  on  the  great  estates. 
Indeed,  in  the  West  at  least,  Chiliasm  was  dead  before  the  country 
regions  were  to  any  measurable  degree  Christian  at  all. 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  apologetic  used  by  St.  Augustine 
to  extirpate  primitive,  Chiliastic  belief  was  only  made  plausable,  or 
ever  possible,  by  profound  changes,  of  an  economic  nature,  in  the 

^  Communist  Manifesto.     Authorized  English  Translation,  Chicago,  1898. 


86  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

early  Church.  The  central  point  of  Augustine's  apologetic  is  that 
the  Church,  as  actually  existing  at  the  time,  was  the  promised  king- 
dom of  Christ  and  the  reign  of  the  Saints  on  earth.  Such  an  explana- 
tion would  have  been  absurd  in  the  days  when  the  Christian  Church 
consisted  only  of  a  few,  small  companies  of  sectaries,  lost  among  the 
lower  strata  of  the  population  of  the  cities  on  the  Mediterranean 
literal.  But  by  Augustine's  time  the  Church  was  something  quite 
different.  It  was  enormously  wealthy;  owning  farms,  orchards, 
vineyards,  olive  yards,  mines,  quarries,  timberlands,  horses,  cattle, 
sheep,  goats,  slaves  and  serfs,  to  say  nothing  of  the  purely  ecclesias- 
tical properties  like  Churches,  schools,  bishops'  residences  and  similar 
structures,  and  the  land  they  occupied. 

The  possession  of  this  great  wealth  inevitably  brought  with  it 
social  position,  pr£stige,  and  political  power.  The  psychical  reaction 
produced  by  wealth,  rank,  and  power  was  naturally  unfavorable  to 
the  growth  of  any  lively  desire  for  the  termination  of  the  existing 
order  of  things.  Indeed  it  was  an  active  force  in  displacing  and  elimi- 
nating Chiliasm  from  the  minds  of  the  hierarchy.  On  the  reverse 
side  we  have  seen  that  the  times  of  persecution,  when  the  property 
of  the  Church  was  confiscated  and  the  lives  and  liberty  of  Christians 
endangered  or  lost,  coincided  with  the  recrudescence  of  Messianic 
expectations.  So  that,  whichever  way  the  subject  is  approached,  it 
would  seem  that  the  contentions  of  the  advocates  of  the  economic 
interpretation  of  history  can  make  out  a  very  good  case  in  the  instance 
of  the  early  Christian  Church  and  Chiliasm.  Without  raising  eco- 
nomic determinism  to  the  rank  of  a  dogma  and  while  admitting  that 
it  has  very  real  limitations,  it  would  nevertheless  appear  from  the 
present  study,  that  the  following  contention  of  one  of  its  leading 
exponents  contains  an  important  degree  of  truth.  "The  relations 
of  men  to  ane  another  in  the  matter  of  making  a  living  are  the  main, 
underlying  causes  of  men's  habits  of  thought  and  feeling,  their 
notions  of  right,  propriety,  and  legality,  their  institutions  of  society 
and  government,  their  wars  and  revolutions."^ 

A  principle  somewhat  allied  to  the  doctrine  of  Economic  Deter- 
minism, is  that  of  progress  by  'Group  Conflict.'  Perhaps  the  most 
notable  exponent  of  this  principle  is  the  Austrian  sociologist,  Ludwig 
Gumplowicz,  who  states:  "When  two  distinct  (heterogen)  groups 

3  W.  J.  Ghent,  Mass  and  Class,  Chap.  1.    New  York,  1905. 


CIIILIASM  AND  SOCIAL  THEORY  87 

come  together  the  natural  tendency  of  each  is  to  exploit  the  other  to 
use  the  most  general  expression.  This  indeed  is  what  gives  the  first 
impulse  to  the  social  process.'' 

According  to  this  principle  we  should  expect  to  find  the  cause  of 
the  transformation  of  early  Christianity  in  the  conflicts  of  various 
groups  within  the  Christian  community  and  in  the  conflicts  between 
the  Christians  as  a  group,  and  various  other  groups  in  the  world  of 
that  time.  The  truth  of  this  is  so  obvious  that  it  is  a  mere  waste 
of  words  to  point  it  out.  That  Christian  theology  evolved  by  a  series 
of  conflicts  with  various  pagan  theologies  on  the  one  side,  and  with 
various  groups  within  the  Church  on  the  other  side,  which  were 
successively  branded  as  heretical,  is  the  most  patent  fact  in  the 
theological  history.  What  is  true  of  the  theology  in  general  is  true  of 
Chilidsm  in  particular.  It  was  very  largely  during  the  conflicts 
with  a  long  series  of  heretical  groups;  Gnostics,  Ebionites,  Alogi, 
Montanists  and  Apolinarians  that  the  blows  were  given  which  finally 
vanquished  Chiliasm.  Its  elimination,  or  at  least  the  rapidity  of 
its  elimination,  was  very  measurably  due  to  the  fact  that  it  was 
involved  in  these  group  conflicts,  and  as  it  was  almost  invariably 
associated  with  the  loosing  group,  it  suffered  the  natural  fate  of  the 
vanquished. 

While  the  principle  of  which  Gumplowicz  was  so  able  a  supporter 
leads  us  to  expect  changes  in  the  Chiliastic  doctrine  wherever  it 
appears  in  connection  with  the  phenomenon  of  group  conflict,  both 
within  and  without  the  Church,  this  principle  does  not,  in  itself, 
enable  us  to  state  anything  definitely  concerning  the  nature  of  these 
changes. 

There  is,  however,  another  sociological  principle  which  we  can 
call  to  our  aid — the  principle  of  Imitation.  According  to  M.  Tarde: 
"The  unvarying  characteristic  of  every  social  fact  whatever  is  that  it 
is  imitative  and  this  characteristic  belongs  exclusively  to  social  facts. 
This  imitation  however,  is  not  absolute  and  the  various  degrees  of 
exactness  in  imitation  and  the  complexes  resulting  from  the  various 
combinations  and  oppositions  of  imitations  form  the  dynamic  of 
progress."^ 

*  Grundriss  der  Sociologie;  Moore's  Translation,  p.  85.  Annals  Am.  Acad.  Pol. 
Sci.  Phil.  1899. 

*  G.  Tarde,  Social  Laws,  p.  41.  New  York,  1899.  The  Laws  of  Imitation,  p.  22. 
New  York,  1903. 


88  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

By  the  help  of  this  principle  we  can  in  a  certain  measure  estimate 
the  general  nature  of  the  changes  which  took  place  in  early  Christian- 
ity during  the  process  of  its  socialization.  The  conversion  of  the 
Roman  Empire  to  Christianity  is,  according  to  this  principle,  merely 
half  of  the  actual  occurrence.  The  other  half  might  be  called  the 
conversion  of  Christianity  to  the  Roman  Empire.  The  fact  that 
this  second  conversion  took  place;  that  the  Christian  Church  became 
a  hierarchic,  bureaucratic,  legalistic,  monarchical  imperialism  is 
evidence  enough  that  the  principle  of  Imitation  operated  powerfully 
in  early  Christian  history. 

What  is  true  of  the  early  Church  as  a  whole  is  true  of  Chihasm  in 
particular.  There  was  no  very  powerful  Second  Adventist  or  other 
Chiliastic  influence  in  the  heathen  world  with  which  the  early  Chris- 
tians were  in  contact.  Their  beliefs  were,  therefore  according  to  this 
theory,  weakened  by  dilution;  vice  versa  the  pagans  were  gradually 
converted  to  an  enfeebled  eschatological  belief  by  imitation  of  the 
Christians,  but  the  net  result  was  a  compromise,  i.e.,  a  far  off  and 
indefinite  eschatology. 

The  concrete  evidence  in  support  of  this  contention  is  not  abund- 
ant being  confined  to  a  few  lines  in  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  Hippolytus, 
Lactantius  and  Augustine.  Such  as  the  evidence  is,  however,  it  is 
entirely  on  the  side  of  the  theory  of  imitation.  It  is  moreover  a  very 
defensible  position  that  if  we  were  not  dealing  with  such  a  stereotyped 
literary  form,  the  evidence  would  be  much  stronger.  One  arresting 
feature  of  the  Chiliastic  passages  that  have  come  down  to  us,  is  their 
uniformity.  They  are  repetitions,  very  often  actual,  verbal  repeti- 
tions of  one  another.  What  is  of  real  interest  in  this  connection 
however,  is  not  the  form  of  words,  used,  but  the  varying  degrees  of 
earnestness,  sincerity,  and  eagerness  with  which  the  beliefs,  embodied 
in  the  form,  were  held.  This  is  a  thing  difficult  if  not  impossible  of 
measurement.  Practically  our  only  means  of  arriving  at  the  facts  is 
to  compare  the  relatively  slight  changes  in  the  form  of  the  Chiliastic 
tradition.  This  has  already  been  done^  and  favors  the  contention 
which  the  theory  of  Imitation  seeks  to  maintain.  The  passage  in  the 
Oracles,  while  undoubtedly  Chiliastic,  is  doubtfully  orthodox  and 
is  found  in  a  context  showing  the  influence  of  paganism  in  almost 
every  line.     Similarly   Hippolytus  and  still  more  Lactantius  and 

^  See  Chap.  I. 


CHILIASM  AND  SOCIAL  THEORY  89 

Augustine  being  situated  so  as  to  be  peculiarly  susceptible  to  the 
pagan  environment  show  a  marked  tendency  to  make  the  Second 
Advent  a  far  off  event.  St.  Augustine,  whose  contact  with  the  con- 
temporary pagan  world  was  more  complete  at  more  points  than  that 
of  any  other  Church  father,  puts  the  Second  Advent  out  of  all  connec- 
tion with  his  own  generation. 

Another  sociological  principle  of  considerable  importance  for  our 
purpose  is  that  sometimes  spoken  of  as  the  transfer  of  the  allegiance 
of  the  unproductive  laborers.  The  most  prominent  upholder  of  this 
principle  is  probably  the  Italian  economist  Achille  Loria.  According 
to  Loria,  the  history  of  civilization  is  the  history  of  the  struggle  for 
the  economic  surplus.  The  existence  of  an  economic  margin  above 
the  necessities  of  subsistence  at  once  divides  society  into  three  classes: 
exploiters,  unproductive  laborers,^  and  productive  laborers.  "In 
order  to  exert  moral  suasion  enough  to  pervert  the  egoism  of  the 
oppressed  classes,  the  cooperation  of  unproductive  laborers  is 
required.  The  decomposition  of  an  established  system  of  capitalistic 
economy  carried  with  it  a  progressive  diminution  of  the  income  from 
property  and  consequently  involves  a  corresponding  falling  off  in  the 
unproductive  laborers'  share  therein.  This  in  turn  dissolves  their 
partnership  with  capital  and  puts  an  end  to  their  task  of  psycho- 
logically coercing  the  productive  laborers.  The  bandage  is  thus 
suddenly  removed  from  the  eyes  of  the  oppressed  and  the  systematic 
perversion  of  human  egoism  up  to  this  time  in  force,  is  abruptly 
brought  to  an  end. 

But  scarcely  has  the  inevitable  course  of  events  hounded  to  its 
grave  the  existing  order  of  oppression,  when  there  arises  another. 
Under  the  new  system  of  suppression  the  ancient  alliance  between 
capital  and  unproductive  labor  is  reestablished  and  at  once  inaugu- 
rates a  new  process  better  adapted  to  pervert  the  egoism  of  the 
productive  laborers."^ 

The  importance  of  tiiis  principle  for  the  understanding  of  our 
subject  cannot  easily  be  overstated.  The  socialization  of  early 
Christianity  proceeded  in  almost  direct  ratio  to  the  number  of 
'unproductive'  laborers  coming  over  to  it.  If  Christianity  had  had 
in  the  First  Century,  such  an  array  of  theologians,  philosophers, 

^i.e.,  The  so-called,  Intellectuals. 

'  Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  pp.  51  seq.     New  York,  1889. 


90  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

apologists,  Statesmen,  and  intellectuals  generally,  as  it  had  in  the 
Fourth  Century,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  its  triumph 
would  have  been  much  more  rapid  and  complete.  On  the  other  hand 
had  the  Pagan  cults  been  able  to  show  as  numerous  and  as  able  a 
body  of  intellectual  defenders  in  the  Fourth  Century  as  in  the  First, 
the  success  of  the  Church  must  have  been  much  retarded.  The 
declension  of  the  artistic,  literary,  and  general  intellectual  level  of 
ancient,  pagan  civilization  during  the  first  three  or  four  centuries  of 
the  Christian  era  is  a  fact  so  well  known  as  to  call  for  no  remark. 
What  is  not  perhaps,  so  well  recognized  is  that  during  the  very  time 
that  the  pagan  world  presents  an  almost  incredible  degree  of  intellec- 
tual feebleness  and  sterility,  the  actual  proportion  of  intellectually 
able  men  in  society  was  remarkably  great.  Rome,  never,  perhaps  in 
her  whole  history,  had  to  her  credit  so  many  men  of  statesman-like 
ability  as  at  the  time  her  empire  was  falling  to  pieces.  The  explana- 
tion is  simple.  The  men  of  genius  and  ability  were  no  longer  inter- 
ested in  the  political  fortunes  of  the  pagan  empire.  They  had  gone 
over  to  a  new  allegiance,  and  expended  in  the  foundation  of  the 
Catholic  Church  a  degree  of  intelligence  and  ability  which,  had  it  been 
placed  at  the  service  of  the  Empire,  might  very  conceivably  have 
enabled  that  Empire  to  survive  to  this  day. 

It  is  certain  that  one  of  the  leading  causes  of  the  collapse  of  the 
pagan  cults  was  their  increasing  inability  to  command  the  support 
of  the  intellectual  leaders  in  society,  and  it  is  no  less  true  that  the 
increasing  success  of  the  Church  was  to  be  ascribed  to  the  ever  larger 
number  of  men  of  intellectual  gifts  who  enrolled  themselves  in  her 
support.  The  fact,  of  course,  is  that  Christianity  offered  increasingly 
an  outlet  for  the  expression  of  abilities  and  capacities  of  mind  and 
soul  such  as  no  pagan  cult  could  provide.  The  most  superficial  com- 
parison of  the  intellectual  forces  for  and  against  Christianity  in  the 
first  century,  with  the  corresponding  array  in  the  fourth  or  fifth  cen- 
turies is  sufficient  to  show  the  enormous  progress  made  by  the  process 
of  socialization  in  the  interval. 

Our  more  particular  concern  is,  however,  with  the  eschatological 
concepts.  A  comparison  of  the  supporters  and  opponents  of  Chiliasm 
at  different  periods  brings  into  clear  view  the  rate  of  its  decline. 
Without  repeating  what  has  been  dealt  with  already,^  it  is  sufficient 

9  Cf.  Chap.  I. 


CIIILIASM  AND  SOCIAL  THEORY  91 

to  recall  that  in  the  first  century  Chiliasm  had  the  support  of  men 
like  St.  Paul  and  the  authors  of  the  Gospels  and  other  New  Testament 
books,  notably  Revelation.  Indeed,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  every 
intellectual  leader  of  the  Christian  movement  for  nearly  a  century 
supported  the  apocolyptic  concepts.  But  as  time  went  on  the  pro- 
portionate number  and  ability  of  its  defenders  declines.  Finally  in 
the  person  of  Origen  in  the  East  and  Augustine  in  the  West  we  find 
the  undisputed  intellectual  leaders  turning  the  whole  intellectual 
class  against  it,  and  so  bringing  about  its  overthrow. 

Still  another  sociological  principle  of  high  importance  because  of 
its  pervasiveness  and  ubiquity  is  that  propounded  by  Prof.  Veblen 
in  what  is  perhaps  the  best  known  of  American  works  on  sociology.^" 
This  principle,  which  may  be  summed  up  by  the  words  Conspicuous 
Honorific  Consumption,  is  that  beliefs  and  customs,  in  order  to 
establish  themselves  and  to  survive  as  socially  reputable,  must 
involve  their  holders  in  purely  honorific  consumption  of  time  and 
economic  goods.  This  consumption  may  be,  and  in  fact  very  largely 
is,  vicarious.  In  this  case  the  functionaries  of  the  vicarious  extrava- 
gance must  be  distinguished  from  their  masters  by  the  introduction 
of  the  element  of  personal  inconvenience  into  the  performance  of 
their  functions. 

Of  the  various  sociological  principles,  so  far  brought  to  our  atten- 
tion this  one  of  Conspicuous  Honorific  Consumption  gives  us  what 
is  probably  the  most  useful  clew  to  follow  for  the  understanding  of  the 
relatively  rapid  decline  and  the  immediately  subsequent  social  dis- 
repute of  the  eschatological  elements  in  early  Christianity.  No  set 
of  theological  concepts  can  be  easily  imagined  which  are  more  antago- 
nistic to  the  canon  of  honorific,  conspicuous  consumption  than  are 
the  eschatological  ones. 

But  the  principle  of  the  reputability  of  waste  is  so  intercalated 
into  ev^ery  form  of  social  usage;  it  plays  so  large  a  part  in  all  moral, 
religious,  literary,  artistic,  political,  military,  and  other  judgments, 
that  in  a  society  like  that  of  the  Roman  Empire  where  pecuniary 
emulation  and  invidious  comparison  were  the  forms  taken  by  the 
'instinct  of  workmanship' — the  propensity  for  achievement — no  set 
of  beliefs  or  observances  which  ran  counter  to  this  principle  could, 
in  a  prolonged  contest,  stand  the  smallest  chance  of  success. 

»"  The  Theory  of  the  Leisure  Class.     New  York,  1899. 


92  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

In  this  respect,  early  Christianity  was  the  more  unequal  to  the 
struggle  in  so  much  as  it  was  the  strongest  in  the  cities.  The  trend 
of  affairs  is  observable  in  the  Church  as  early  as  the  appearance  of 
the  Epistle  of  James.  Under  urban  conditions  the  law  of  conspicuous 
consumption  works  with  peculiar  power  and  it  tended  toward  the 
rapid  elimination  of  those  doctrines  and  observances  which  operated 
to  keep  out  of  the  Church  the  wealthy,  powerful,  and  fashionable 
elements  of  society.  Within  a  relatively  short  time,  by  the  operation 
of  this  principle,  the  originally  respectable  doctrine  of  Millenananism 
was  rendered  disreputable  and  even  heretical.  It  was  an  important 
agency  in  bringing  into  sharp  relief  the  distinction  of  clergy  and  laity, 
while  in  the  appearance  of  monasticism  we  see  the  working  out  of 
this  principle  among  the  strongest  (theoretical)  opponents. 

Had  Christianity  in  the  beginning  found  a  considerable  propor- 
tion of  its  adherents  among  the  laboring  classes  in  the  rural  regions 
there  can  be  very  little  doubt  that  it  would  have  maintained  the 
purity  of  its  early  doctrines  for  a  much  more  considerable  period  of 
time  than  was  actually  the  case.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that, 
in  that  event,  Chiliastic  expectations  would  have  survived  in  Chris- 
tian theology  far  longer  than  they  did.  "Among  the  working  classes 
in  a  sedentary  community  which  is  at  an  agricultural  stage  of  industry 
in  which  there  is  a  considerable  subdivision  of  property  and  whose 
laws  and  customs  secure  to  these  classes  a  more  or  less  definite  share 
of  the  product  of  their  industry,  pecuniary  emulation  tends  in  a 
certain  measure  to  such  industry  and  frugality  as  serve  to  weaken 
in  some  degree  the  full  force  of  the  principle  of  honorific,  and  more 
especially  of  vicariously  honorific  wastefulness."  That  is  to  say 
such  conditions  tend  to  conservatism  in  general  and  possibly  to 
religious  conservatism  in  particular.  But  for  this  very  reason  Chris- 
tianity made  its  way  only  very  slowly  into  the  rural  regions.  In  the 
West,  indeed,  ChiHasm  was  already  dead  before  the  Church  had  won 
any  great  headway  among  the  agricultural  population — which  was 
not  until  the  sixth  and  seventh  centuries.  Had  Chiliasm  been  able 
to  hold  its  own  until  the  conversion  of  the  rural  regions,  it  would 
certainly  have  survived  there  for  generations  if  not  centuries — even 
if  it  had  died  out  in  the  urban  centers. 

In  the  East,  where  Christianity  made  its  way  among  the  rural 
population,  at  least  in  some  degree,  considerably  earlier  than  was 


CHILIASM  AND  SOCIAL  THEORY  93 

the  case  in  the  West,  Chiliasm  did  get  a  hold  in  certain  agricultural 
regions  of  Phrygia,  Syria,  Egypt,  and  elsewhere,  and  it  was  in  pre- 
cisely such  regions,  as  we  have  already  seen,  that  it  was  held  most 
tenaciously  and  abandoned  most  slowly. 

Prof.  F.  H.  Giddings  of  Columbia  University  is  the  sponsor  of 
the  last  sociological  principle  which  will  be  mentioned  in  this  connec- 
tion. His  principle  is  known  as  the  "Consciousness  of  Kind." 
According  to  Prof.  Giddings:  "  Consciousness  of  Kind  is  that  pleasur- 
able state  of  mind  which  includes  organic  sympathy,  the  perception 
of  resemblance  conscious  or  reflective  sympathy,  affection  and  the 
desire  for  recognition."'^  "This  consciousness  is  a  social  and  socializ- 
ing force,  sometimes  exceedingly  delicate  and  subtle  in  its  action, 
sometimes  turbulent  and  all  powerful.  Assuming  endlessly  varied 
modes  of  prejudice  and  of  prepossession,  of  liking  and  of  disliking, 
of  love  and  of  hate,  it  tends  always  to  reconstruct  and  to  dominate 
every  mode  of  association  and  every  social  grouping, "'^ 

By  means  of  this  very  comprehensive  principle  many  otherwise 
merely  stray  and  isolated  items  of  information  that  have  come  down 
to  use  regarding  early  Christianity  can  be  given  a  place  and  a  meaning 
in  the  graduated  series  of  phenomena  which  mark  the  transition  from 
the  eschatological  to  the  socialized  movement.  Such,  for  instance, 
are  the  exhibitions  of  consciousness  of  kind  according  to  differences 
and  similarities  of  sex,  age,  kinship,  language,  political  beliefs, 
occupations,  rank,  locality,  wealth,  and  the  like.  The  very  number 
of  ways  in  which  consciousness  of  kind  exerts  influence  makes  this 
principle  of  very  great  use  when  the  task  is  that  of  forming  a  general 
conclusion  from  the  investigation  of  sources  which  are  incomplete, 
inconclusive  and  sometimes  contradictory. 

The  difTerent  sociological  principles  mentioned  above  are  intended 
as  specimens  only.  The  list  is  not  in  any  sense  complete.  No  atten- 
tion is  paid  to  other  principles  held  as  coordinates  or  as  correlates 
of  those  referred  to.  Whole  classes  of  principles,  the  anthropological 
and  geographic,  for  instance,  are  consciously  omitted.  The  list  is  in 
the  highest  degree  a  hit-and-miss  selection  and  the  more  casual  it  is, 
the  better  for  the  purpose  in  hand.  This  purpose  is  to  show  that  any 
given  series  of  principles  elucidated  by  students  of  our  contemporary 

"  Inductive  Sociology,  p.  99,  New  York,  1901. 

"  Descriptive  and  Historical  Sociology,  p.  275,  New  York,  1906. 


94  THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY 

modern  civilization,  will  be  found  to  have  been  operating  in  discern- 
able  fashion  in  the  case  of  an  obscure  form  of  theological  speculation 
in  the  first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  That  Chiliasm  was  the 
natural  result  of  the  heredity  and  environment  of  the  early  Chris- 
tians, or  perhaps  better,  the  natural  result  of  the  reaction  of  inherited 
elements  in  vital  contact  with  the  contemporary  world,  will  probably 
be  admitted  readily  enough  by  anyone  who  has  followed  the  dis- 
cussion thus  far.  But  the  aim  of  this  thesis,  particularly  of  this  last 
chapter,  is  something  more  than  that.  Its  aim  is  to  uphold  the  con- 
tention that  the  forces  now  operating  in  society  to  shape  and  reshape 
beliefs  and  opinions  are  the  very  same  in  kind  as  operated  in  the 
society  of  the  Roman  Empire.  In  short,  any  explanation  of 
early  Christian  Chiliasm  which  seeks  to  bring  in  the  operation  of  any 
social  principles  which  cannot  be  shown  to  be  objectively  operative 
in  contemporary  society  is  to  be  viewed  with  a  certain  measure  of 
doubt,  if  not  of  suspicion. 

It  may  be  taken  as  a  safe  assumption  that  all  attempts  to  obtain 
a  complete  explanation  of  any  historical  event  in  terms  of  one  prin- 
ciple of  one  science  are  foredoomed  to  failure.  The  same  is  true,  in 
less  degree,  even  if  we  take  all  the  so  far  discovered  principles  of 
any  one  science.  In  order  to  give  anything  like  a  really  comprehen- 
sive explanation  of  the  historical  process  which  forms  the  subject  of 
this  thesis  there  would  be  required  the  contributions  of  the  principles 
of  economics,  political  science,  psychology,  and  the  other  social 
sciences.  Such  a  synthesis  of  principles  is  beyond  the  ability  of  any 
one  individual.  The  application  of  them  all  to  our  subject  would  be 
a  task  requiring  the  cooperation  of  many  specialists  in  many  lines 
for  some  not  inconsiderable  period  of  time.  The  writer's  task  will 
not  perhaps  have  beei  utterly  in  vain,  if  he  has,  even  in  the  slightest 
measure,  helped  to  bring  home  to  a  single  reader,  this  important  fact. 


COLUMBl*  UNIVERSITY  UBBARIES 


0057102961 


^^^ 


\iTy 


